natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Strupeni material je pokončal veliko organizmov, poškodoval ekološki sistem in prehransko verigo ter ljudem za mnogo let preprečil osnovno uporabo reke.
Toxic materials killed many organisms, damaging the ecological system, food chain and essential human use of the river for many years.
Čeprav je bilo sprejetih več zakonov EU za okrepitev pravil uporabe cianida v rudarstvu – nekatere države članice so ga celo že prepovedale –, se ta tehnologija na ozemlju Unije lahko še vedno zakonito uporablja.
Although several pieces of EU legislation have been adopted in order to strengthen the rules on the use of cyanide in mining - some Member States have even introduced a ban on it - the technology can still be used in the territory of the European Union, legally.
Manjkajo pa previdnostna pravila in ustrezna finančna jamstva , izvajanje obstoječe zakonodaje pa je tudi odvisno od sposobnosti izvršne oblasti posameznih držav članic.
Nevertheless, prudential rules and proper financial guarantees are still missing, and the implementation of the existing legislation also depends on the skills of the executive powers of each Member State.
Zato nič ne zagotavlja, da se takšna nesreča ne bo ponovno pripetila, zlasti če upoštevamo vedno bolj skrajne vremenske razmere, ki so posledica podnebnih sprememb.
Therefore, there is no real guarantee that such an accident will not happen again, especially taking into consideration the escalating extreme weather conditions as a consequence of climate change.
V Evropi je več obstoječih in načrtovanih projektov rudarjenja s cianidom, zato je le še vprašanje časa in človekove malomarnosti, kdaj se bo zgodila katastrofa.
There are several existing and planned cyanide mining projects across Europe and it is only a matter of time and human negligence for a catastrophe to occur.
Ob upoštevanju, da evropska industrija pridobivanja zlata predstavlja le 1% svetovne proizvodnje zlata, v njej pa so udeležene v glavnem multinacionalne družbe, ter da je rudarjenje s cianidom manj zaposlitveno intenzivno, obenem pa pomeni tveganje ogromne čezmejne ekološke škode, je treba razmišljati o splošni prepovedi rudarjenja s cianidom na ravni Evropske unije.
Taking into account the fact that the European gold mining industry represents only 1% of global gold production, performed mostly by multinational companies, and that cyanide mining is less job-intensive, while it runs the risk of enormous cross-border ecological damage, a general ban on cyanide mining should be considered at a European Union level.
Ali bo Komisija glede na previdnostno načelo v okoljski zakonodaji EU in glede na obveze, sprejete v okviru okvirne direktive o vodah, o preprečevanju in onesnaženja in nadzora nad njim ter o doseganju in ohranjanju dobrega stanja vod, predlagala prepoved uporabe cianida pri pridobivanju zlata v vsej Evropski uniji?
Given the precautionary principle of the EU environmental legislation and in the light of the commitments under the WFD to prevent and control pollution, as well as to reach and preserve 'good status' of waters, will the Commission propose an EU-wide ban on the use of cyanide in gold mining?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0036/10
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0036/10
Zadeva: Posebni ukrepi za kmetijske trge
Subject: Specific measures for agricultural markets
Ali Komisija namerava v prihajajočih mesecih predlagati nujne posebne ukrepe zaradi slabega povpraševanja na številnih kmetijskih področjih, nestabilnosti cen na trgu ter znižanja prihodka proizvajalcev, ki smo jim bili priča v teh mesecih, preden bodo podani zakonodajni predlogi za prihodnost skupne kmetijske politike za obdobje po letu 2013?
In view of the weak demand and prices in many agricultural sectors, the volatility of market prices and the decline in producer income witnessed in recent months, does the Commission intend, as a matter of urgency, to propose specific measures in the coming months, ahead of legislative proposals concerning the future of the CAP after 2013?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0037/10/rev.1
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0037/10/rev.1
Zadeva: Morebitna zloraba prevladujočega položaja Googla na notranjem trgu pri spletnem oglaševanju in svobodi obveščanja na medmrežju
Subject: Possible abuse by Google of its dominant position in the online advertising business within the internal market, and freedom of information on the internet
V zadnjih mesecih je bila nacionalnim organom za varstvo konkurence na podlagi vloženih pritožb nekaterih podjetij, kot je britansko Foundem, nemško Ciao ali francosko ejustice.fr, v Italiji (avgusta 2009), Nemčiji (januarja 2010) in Franciji (februarja 2010) predložena zahteva, naj ocenijo, ali ravnanje podjetja Google kaže na zlorabo prevladujočega položaja pri medmrežnem oglaševanju.
Over the last few months, national competition authorities in Italy (August 2009), Germany (January 2010) and France (February 2010) have been asked to investigate whether Google’s behaviour amounts to abuse of its dominant position in the internet advertising business, following complaints lodged by several companies, such as the British company Foundem, the Germany company Ciao and the French company Ejustice.
Tudi Komisija je nedavno sporočila, da bo pregledala vložene pritožbe, vendar zaenkrat še ne bo začela uradne preiskave.
The Commission has recently announced that it is considering the complaints lodged without, for the time being, opening an official investigation.
Spletni brskalnik Google ima več kot 80 % tržnega deleža v Evropski uniji, njegov prevladujoči položaj pa omogoča zastavljanje številnih vprašanj v zvezi s konkurenco na notranjem trgu (morebitna zloraba prevladujočega položaja pri spletnem oglaševanju) ter zaskrbljenost v zvezi s svobodo obveščanja (izločanje spletišč, selekcija nudenih informacij).
Google has an EU market share of more than 80%, and the dominant position of its search engine gives rise to concerns regarding both competition in the internal market, with a possible abuse of a dominant position in the online advertising market, and freedom of information, owing to the delisting of websites and selection of the information provided.
Moč Googla kot spletnega brskalnika je v edinstveni prednosti, ki jo ima zaradi natančnega poznavanja odjemalcev in uporabe svetovnega spleta.
The might of Google’s search engine gives it a unique asset in terms of detailed knowledge of the audience and web usage.
Tako ima Google zelo veliko količino občutljivih in osebnih podatkov o spletnih uporabnikih.
As a result, Google possesses huge quantities of sensitive and personal data on internet users.
Googlovo posedovanje teh podatkov v povezavi z njegovim prevladujočim položajem skrbi mnoge evropske državljane.
The fact that Google holds this data and enjoys such a dominant position is a matter of concern for many people in Europe.
Ali Komisija ne meni, da je glede na pritožbe pri nacionalnih organih za varstvo konkurence v treh državah članicah treba začeti uradno preiskavo na evropski ravni o morebitnem prevladujočem položaju Googla na notranjem trgu na področju spletnega oglaševanja?
Given that complaints have been lodged with national competition authorities in three Member States, would the Commission not agree that it is necessary to open an official investigation at European level regarding the possible abuse by Google of a dominant position in the EU online advertising market?
Katere mehanizme Komisija šteje kot potrebne za boljšo ureditev delovanja trga spletnega oglaševanja na notranjem trgu Evropske unije?
What mechanisms does the Commission consider necessary to better regulate the online advertising market’s functioning within the EU internal market?
Ali namerava Komisija v zvezi s tem predložiti kakšno pobudo?
Does it intend to propose an initiative in this respect?
Katere ukrepe namerava Komisija sprejeti za boljše zagotavljanje varstva svobode obveščanja na medmrežju?
What steps does it intend to take in order to better protect freedom of information on the internet?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0038/10
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0038/10
, v imenu skupine ECR ,
, on behalf of the ECR Group,
Zadeva: Uporaba blagovnih znamk Skupnosti na notranjem trgu
Subject: Use of Community trade marks in the internal market
Glede na nujnost učinkovitega boja proti uvozu ogromnih količin ponarejenega in piratskega blaga na enotni trg obstaja močna potreba po zmožnosti za zasego in umik tega blaga v skladu s carinsko uredbo EU na vseh zunanjih mejah EU, ne glede na kraj uvoza.
In view of the necessity to fight effectively against massive importation of counterfeited and pirated goods into the single market, there is a strong need to be able to seize and withdraw these goods under the EU Customs Regulation at all of the EU's external borders, irrespective of the place of importation.
Se Komisija zaveda, da nekatere države članice zdaj poskušajo omejiti uporabo blagovnih znamk Skupnosti z uvedbo nove zahteve, v skladu s katero uporaba blagovne znamke Skupnosti v eni državi članici ne zadošča?
Is the Commission aware that some Member States are currently attempting to restrict the use of Community trade marks through the introduction of a new requirement, according to which the use of a Community trade mark within one Member State is not sufficient?
Se Komisija zaveda, da to ne ovira le učinkovitega boja proti piratstvu blagovnih znamk, ampak tudi dostop malih in srednjih podjetij do blagovne znamke Skupnosti?
Is the Commission aware that this not only impedes the effective combating of trade mark piracy, but also hampers access to the Community trade mark for SMEs?
Ali lahko Komisija potrdi, da se bo tem poskusom držav članic učinkovito zoperstavila?
Can the Commission confirm that it will counter these attempts by Member States in an effective way?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0039/10
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0039/10
Zadeva: Moratorij za izvajanje Direktive 2008/6/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 20.2.2008
Subject: Moratorium on the implementation of Directive 2008/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 February 2008
Dostopnost vsem ponudnikom na trg pa ni edina določba te direktive.
The accessibility of the market to any operator is not the only provision set in this directive.
Ta direktiva tudi jasno naroča državam članicam, naj varujejo dobre delovne razmere in omogočijo zanesljivo univerzalno storitev za vse.
It also clearly instructs Member States to protect good working conditions and provide a reliable universal service to all.
Poleg tega so v Prilogi I navedene obveznosti iz člena 3 Direktive 97/67/ES , po katerih morajo države članice izvesti ustrezne študije za izračun neto stroškov za obveznost univerzalne storitve in navesti način, ki je bil izbran za povrnitev ali financiranje teh neto stroškov.
Moreover, as stated in Annex I referring to the obligations set in Article 3 of Directive 97/67/EC , Member States should provide appropriate studies concerning the calculation of the net costs of universal service obligations and the way chosen to ensure the recovery or the financing of such net costs.
Do zdaj niso bile opravljene študije, ne o socialnih posledicah ne o ustreznih upravnih ukrepih držav članic, s katerimi bi se zagotovila popolno dostopnost do poštnih storitev.
Until now no study of either the social consequences or of the appropriate regulatory measures taken by the Member States to ensure full accessibility to postal services has been provided.
Ker je to bil predpogoj iz direktive, ali se Komisija strinja, da se liberalizacija ne more nadaljevati, dokler ne bo opravljena študija?
Since this was set as a precondition in the directive, does the Commission agree that the liberalisation cannot continue until this study is provided?
Ali lahko Komisija navede, kako opredeljuje dobre delovne razmere?
Could the Commission indicate what it would consider good working conditions?
Ali tja sodi vsaj minimalna plača za državo članico, ali če omejitve za minimalne plače ni, vsaj minimalna plača za ta sektor?
Is this at least the minimum wage applicable in the Member State, or if there is no minimum wage at least the wage minimum applicable for the sector?
Ali lahko Komisija pojasni, kaj sploh pojmuje kot zanesljivo univerzalno storitev za vse?
Could the Commission indicate what it would consider a reliable universal service to all?
Če se zahteve na liberaliziranem trgu ne morejo izpolniti, ali bi se Komisija v tem primeru strinjala, da je treba liberalizacijo poštnega trga opustiti?
If the provisions cannot be achieved under a liberalised market, would the Commission then agree that liberalisation in the postal market should eventually be abandoned?
UL L 52, 27.2.2008, str.
OJ L 52, 27.2.2008, p.
UL L 15, 21.1.1998, str.
OJ L 15, 21.1.1998, p.
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0040/10
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0040/10
Zadeva: Na načelih pravne države temelječ pristop do odnosov med EU in Rusijo na področju energije
Subject: Rule-of-law approach to EU-Russia energy relations
Leta 2008 so se začela pogajanja o novem sporazumu med Evropsko unijo in Rusijo.
Negotiations on a new agreement between the European Union and Russia were launched in 2008.
Vendar je avgusta 2009 Ruska federacija EU uradno obvestila, da ne namerava postati pogodbenica pogodbe o energetski listini in protokola o energetski učinkovitosti in s tem povezanimi okoljskimi vidiki.
However, in August 2009, the Russian Federation officially informed the EU that it did not intend to become a Contracting Party to the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) and the Protocol on Energy Efficiency and Related Environmental Aspects (PEEREA).
Posledica tega je bilo prenehanje začasne uporabe pogodbe in protokola v Rusiji 18. oktobra 2009.
This resulted in Russia's termination of its provisional application of the ECT and the PEEREA on 18 October 2009.
Investicije v energetski sektor po tem, ko je Rusija leta 1994 podpisala pogodbo, bodo zaradi določb pogodbe zavarovane naslednjih 20 let, vse nove tuje investicije, ki so bile opravljene po 18. oktobru 2009, pa ne bodo upravičene do visoke ravni zaščite, ki jo zagotavlja pogodba.
Investments in the energy sector made since Russia signed the ECT in 1994 will still be protected by ECT provisions for another 20 years, but all new foreign investments made after 18 October 2009 will not enjoy the high level of protection bestowed by the ECT.
Novembra 2009 je ad hoc razsodišče pod okriljem Stalnega arbitražnega sodišča s sedežem v Haagu v zadevi, ki jo je sprožila večina delničarjev nekdanje družbe Yukos Oil, odločilo, da je pogodba o energetski listini za Rusijo zavezujoča, čeprav je duma ni ratificirala.
In November 2009, an ad hoc Arbitral Tribunal under the auspices of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, sitting in the Hague, ruled, in a case initiated by the majority of shareholders of the former Yukos Oil Company, that the ECT is binding on Russia despite the fact that it has not been ratified by the Duma.
Odločitev je potrdila pomen pravno zavezujočih mehanizmov za energetski sektor, saj delničarji Yukosa iz ZDA, ki niso zajeti v pogodbi, od omenjene nedavne odločitve razsodišča nimajo koristi.
This decision confirmed the importance of legally binding mechanisms for the energy sector, as the US shareholders of Yukos, which are not covered by the ECT, cannot benefit from this recent ruling.
V okviru potekajočih pogajanj o novem sporazumu in ob upoštevanju zgoraj opisanih dogodkov:
In the framework of the current negotiations on a new agreement with Russia and considering the developments highlighted above:
Kako namerava Svet zagotoviti, da bo pristop do odnosov med EU in Rusijo na področju energije, trdno utemeljen na načelih pravne države?
What are the Council's plans to ensure a solid rule-of-law approach to EU-Russia energy relations?
Ali si bo Svet prizadeval za pravno zavezujoče določbe v novem sporazumu, ki bodo enako trdne kot tiste v pogodbi o energetski listini?
Will the Council seek legally binding provisions in the new agreement which are as solid as those included in the ECT?
Kako lahko Svet zagotovi, da bodo evropske družbe, ki od oktobra 2009 investirajo in poslujejo v ruskem energetskem sektorju, obravnavane pregledno in ob upoštevanju pravne varnosti?
How can the Council ensure that European companies investing and operating in the energy sector in Russia since October 2009 will enjoy transparency and legal certainty?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0041/10
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0041/10
Leta 2008 so se začela pogajanja za nov sporazum med Evropsko unijo in Rusijo.
Negotiations on a new agreement between the European Union and Russia were launched in 2008.
V okviru potekajočih pogajanj o novem sporazumu z Rusijo in ob upoštevanju zgoraj opisanih dogodkov:
In the framework of the current negotiations on a new agreement with Russia and considering the developments highlighted above:
Kako namerava Komisija zagotoviti, da bo pristop do odnosov med EU in Rusijo na področju energije, trdno utemeljen na načelih pravne države?
What are the Commission's plans to ensure a solid rule-of-law approach to EU-Russia energy relations?
Ali si bo Komisija prizadevala za pravno zavezujoče določbe v novem sporazumu, ki bodo enako trdne kot tiste v pogodbi o energetski listini?
Will the Commission seek legally binding provisions in the new agreement which are as solid as those included in the ECT?
Kako lahko Komisija zagotovi, da bodo evropske družbe, ki od oktobra 2009 investirajo in poslujejo v ruskem energetskem sektorju, obravnavane pregledno in ob upoštevanju pravne varnosti?
How can the Commission ensure that European companies investing and operating in the energy sector in Russia since October 2009 will enjoy transparency and legal certainty?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0042/10
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0042/10
Zadeva: Nova dognanja v zvezi s programom izrednih izročitev obveščevalne agencije CIA in skrivnimi zapori na ozemlju EU
Subject: New developments in CIA extraordinary renditions programme and secret prisons on EU soil
Mediji so leta 2009 razkrili, da je v Litvi v letih 2004 in 2005 deloval skrivni zapor, v katerem naj bi z mučenjem zasliševali mednarodne teroristične osumljence, zaradi česar je moral Parlament sprožiti tretjo preiskavo.
In 2009 the media revealed that from 2004 to 2005 a secret prison had operated in Lithuania where torture was allegedly used to interrogate international terrorism suspects, leading Parliament to open a third enquiry.
Litva naj bi privolila v odprtje zapora, potem ko ji je prejšnji ameriški predsednik Bush obljubil podporo pri vstopu v Nato.
Lithuania allegedly agreed to the prison after former President Bush pledged to support Lithuania’s entry into NATO.
Na Poljskem so tožilci, potem ko je parlamentarna preiskava zanikala obstoj skrivnih zaporov na Poljskem, sprožili kriminalistično preiskavo o zaporu, ki naj bi se nahajal v bližini nekdanjega vojaškega letalskega oporišča .
In Poland, after a parliamentary enquiry denied the presence of secret prisons on Polish soil, prosecutors have opened a criminal investigation regarding the alleged existence of a prison near a former military air base .
Februarja 2010 so informacije, ki jih je objavila poljska agencija za letalstvo, potrdile, da je na poljskem ozemlju pristalo več letal, s katerimi so bile opravljene izredne izročitve.
In February 2010 newly-released information from the Polish aviation agency confirmed that a number of rendition flights had landed on Polish territory.
Italijansko sodišče je 4. novembra 2009 v odsotnosti obsodilo 23 ameriških državljanov in dva člana italijanske obveščevalne službe zaradi sodelovanja pri ugrabitvi Abu Omarja, ki so ga ugrabili decembra 2003 v Milanu in ga v tajnosti izročili Egiptu, kjer so ga nato po njegovih besedah mučili in trpinčili.
On 4 November 2009, an Italian court convicted 23 US nationals in absentia and two Italian intelligence officials for their involvement in the kidnapping in Milan in December 2003 of Abu Omar, who was secretly rendered to Egypt where he claimed he was tortured and ill-treated.
Vlade so zadevo ena za drugo razglasile za državno skrivnost, da bi preprečile razkritje pomembnih dokazov .
Successive governments invoked ‘state secrets’ to avoid disclosure of important evidence .
Eden obsojenih agentov agencije CIA je medijem priznal, da so sicer prekršili zakon, a so bile odločitve sprejete v Washingtonu, medtem ko je ameriška administracija izrazila razočaranje nad sodbo italijanskega sodišča .
One of the convicted CIA agents admitted to the media that they ‘broke the law’ and that decisions were taken in Washington, while the US Administration declared that they were ‘disappointed’ by the Italian Court judgment .
Vlada Združenega kraljestva je večkrat nasprotovala objavi dokaznega gradiva, ki njihovim obveščevalnim službam očita, da so sodelovale pri zasliševanju prebivalca Združenega kraljestva Binjama Mohameda in bile seznanjene s tem, da so ga agenti agencije CIA mučili in trpinčili.
In the UK, the government repeatedly opposed the release of evidence demonstrating that UK intelligence services were involved in the interrogation and knew of the torture and ill-treatment of UK resident Binyam Mohamed by CIA agents.
Višje sodišče je 19. novembra že šestič zapored odklonilo zahteve vlade po nerazkritju informacij .
On 19 November 2009, the High Court dismissed – for the 6th time – the government’s request to withhold the information .
In nenazadnje, skupna študija posebnih poročevalcev ZN o „globalni praksi v zvezi s skrivnimi pridržanji v okviru boja proti terorizmu“ med državami, vpletenimi v takšno nezakonito ravnanje, navaja tudi vrsto držav članic EU.
Finally, a UN joint special rapporteurs’ study on ‘global practices in relation to secret detention in the context of countering terrorism’ lists a series of EU Member States among those involved in such illegal practices.
Kako namerava Svet v primeru kršitev temeljnih pravic, do katerih je prišlo na ozemlju EU v okviru programov izrednih izročitev in skrivnih pridržanj pod vodstvom ZDA, poiskati resnico in zadostiti pravici ter zagotoviti, da se te kršitve ne bodo ponovile?
What steps does the Council intend to take to ensure that truth and justice are brought in relation to fundamental rights violations that took place on EU soil in the context of the US-led rendition and secret detention programmes and that such abuses do not happen in the future?
Ali lahko Svet posreduje podrobne informacije o tem, kaj je doslej storil, da bi pojasnil te hude obtožbe?
Can the Council provide a detailed account of what it has done so far in response to these serious allegations?
Ali je Svet seznanjen z Natovim sporazumom z dne 4. oktobra 2001 in s katerimi ukrepi namerava zagotoviti, da se EU v boju proti terorizmu in pri sodelovanju s tretjimi državami, predvsem z ZDA, ne bo odpovedala demokraciji in temeljnim pravicam?
Is the Council aware of the NATO agreement of 4 October 2001 and what will it do to ensure that the EU does not sacrifice democracy and fundamental rights in the fight against terrorism and in its cooperation with third States, notably the US?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0043/10
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0043/10
Zadeva: Nova dognanja v zvezi s programom izrednih izročitev obveščevalne agencije CIA in skrivnimi zapori na ozemlju EU
Subject: New developments on the CIA extraordinary renditions programme and secret prisons on EU soil