natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
A če želimo, da bi postal dobičkonosen, moramo poskrbeti, da bo bolj konkurenčen in odprt.
But in order to benefit from this market, it had to become more competitive and open.
Predlog direktive o storitvah, kot ga je predstavila Evropska komisija na začetku leta 2004, je dvignil veliko prahu in celo vplival na zavrnitev Ustavne pogodbe na referendumu v Franciji.
The proposal for a directive on services, as presented by the Commission in early 2004, had caused so much controversy as to affect the French rejection of the Constitution.
Sporno je bilo predvsem načelo države izvora, po katerem bi bilo ponudnikom storitev dovoljeno, da v drugi državi članici delujejo pod pogoji, ki veljajo v njihovi državi.
The main issue in question was the ‘country of origin principle’, which would have allowed service providers to operate in another Member State under the same conditions as in their country of origin.
V Evropskem parlamentu in širši evropski javnosti so se nekateri bali, da bi to omogočilo nezdravo konkurenco med državami članicami in socialni dumping, drugi pa so poudarjali, da je treba olajšati prosti pretok delavcev in izboljšati konkurenčnost sektorja.
In the European Parliament, as in EU public opinion, some feared that this would pave the way to unhealthy competition between Member States, and social dumping, while others stressed the need to facilitate the free movement of workers and improve the sector’s competitiveness.
Predstavniki držav članic v Svetu so bili močno razdeljeni, evropski poslanci pa so uspeli preseči razhajanja in oblikovati direktivo, ki bo omogočila večjo odprtost notranjega trga storitev za čezmejno konkurenco ter hkrati ohranila evropski socialni model.
While the Member States’ representatives were deeply divided in the Council, MEPs managed to overcome their differences of opinion, eventually securing a directive which would allow the internal services market to open up more widely to cross-border competition whilst protecting the European social model.
Parlament znova vzpostavil ravnotežje med ekonomijo in socialnimi pravicami
Parliament redresses the balance between the economy and social rights
Leto in pol je kar deset parlamentarnih odborov preučevalo različne rešitve, da bi prišli do za vse bolj sprejemljivega besedila.
In Parliament, for over a year and a half, various solutions were considered by at least ten parliamentary committees in order to make the text more consensual.
Na trenutke zelo burna razprava se je končala februarja 2006 z dogovorom med največjima političnima skupinama, Evropsko ljudsko stranko in evropskimi socialdemokrati.
The debate – at times very heated – ended in February 2006 with an agreement between Parliament’s largest political groups – the PPE and the PSE.
Po prvi obravnavi na plenarnem zasedanju je besedilo izrecno določalo, da direktiva v ničemer ne bo vplivala na delovno zakonodajo v državah članicah, na pogoje dela in zaposlitve ali na pogodbene odnose med delodajalcem in zaposlenim, ne glede na to, ali temeljijo na zakonskih določbah ali kolektivnih pogodbah.
Following this first reading in plenary, the text explicitly specified that the directive would have no effect on labour law in the Member States, nor on working or employment conditions or contractual relations between employer and employee, be they based on national law or on collective agreements.
Ta kompromis so v nadaljevanju kot bistveno točko sprejele tudi države članice in v drugi obravnavi novembra 2006 je besedilo potrdila velika večina poslancev.
The key parts of this compromise were subsequently accepted by the Member States and confirmed by a large majority of Parliament at second reading in November 2006.
Lažje zagotavljanje storitev, vendar z določenimi varovalkami
Provision of services made easier, with certain safeguards
Direktiva, ki jo bo treba začeti izvajati najkasneje 28. decembra 2009, naj bi zelo poenostavila delovanje ponudnikov storitev v drugi državi članici.
The directive, which should be applied throughout the EU by 28 December 2009 at the latest, should make it significantly easier for a service provider to set up business in another Member State.
Podjetju, ki bo na primer želelo upravljati nek hotel v drugi članici, se ne bo treba več dogovarjati z različnimi oblastmi (nacionalnimi, regionalnimi ali lokalnimi), ampak bo lahko po načelu "vse na enem mestu" vse upravne formalnosti uredilo pri enem pristojnem organu.
For example, a company which wants to manage a hotel in another EU country will no longer have to deal with several different authorities (national, regional or local), but with a single ‘one-stop shop’ for all administrative formalities.
Direktiva izrecno prepoveduje omejevanje svobodnega opravljanja storitev.
The directive explicitly prohibits any restrictions on the freedom to provide services.
Začasno opravljanje storitev v drugi državi EU bo zato bolj enostavno.
It will therefore be easier than before to provide services temporarily in another EU country.
Tako ne bo več mogoče zahtevati, da ima na primer gorski vodnik stalno prebivališče na območju, kjer želi začasno opravljati svoj poklic.
For instance, countries will no longer be able to demand that a mountain guide must become a resident of the country in which he wishes to temporarily pursue his occupation.
Kljub temu pa bo moral začasni ponudnik storitev spoštovati delovno in socialno zakonodajo države, kjer bo delal.
However, temporary providers will be subject to the labour and social laws of the country in which they are working.
Direktiva namreč ne bo vplivala na delovno zakonodajo in kolektivne pravice, ki pripadajo delavcem držav članic.
Moreover, the directive will affect neither the labour law nor the collective rights which workers in the Member States currently enjoy.
Izločene storitve
Services excluded
Nekaj storitev je izločenih iz področja uporabe direktive.
A number of services have been excluded from the scope of the directive, such as services of non-economic general interest, certain social services or services that are already covered by sectoral legislation (audiovisual, financial or transport services).
Gre zlasti za negospodarske storitve splošnega pomena, nekatere socialne storitve in tiste, za katere že zdaj velja posebna sektorska zakonodaja (avdiovizualne, finančne in transportne storitve).
As regards the issue of services of general interest, the Treaty of Lisbon, currently under ratification, addresses this issue to some extent, in that it recognises the specific characteristics of those services.
Direktiva ne zajema zdravstvenih storitev, zato pa je v parlamentarni obravnavi predlog Evropske komisije iz julija 2008 o pravicah pacientov do čezmejnega zdravstvenega varstva.
With regard to health services, also not covered by the directive, Parliament is currently working on the Commission proposal of July 2008 on patients’ cross-border healthcare rights.
Cilj tega predloga je olajšati povračilo stroškov za zdravstvene storitve, opravljene v drugi državi članici.
The aim is to facilitate the reimbursement of medical services provided in another Member State.
Sporočilo za javnost Evropskega parlamenta Dodatno gradivo o direktivi (v angleščini)
The leader of the IND/DEM Group, Jens-Peter Bonde (DK) thought it was ‘a directive for lawyers and judges.
Železniške storitve: več izbire in jasnejše pravice potnikov
EU-wide rail services: more choice and clearer rights for passengers
Od januarja 2010 bodo železniški potniki na povezavah med članicami Unije lahko izbirali med več prevozniki.
From January 2010, train passengers travelling from one EU country to another can expect to see more rail companies competing on these international connections.
Septembra 2007 je Evropski parlament potrdil zakonodajo, ki bo omogočila čezmejno konkurenco med evropskimi železniškimi družbami ter zagotovila osnovne pravice potnikov in ustrezno usposobljenost strojevodij.
In September 2007, the European Parliament adopted legislation to enable Europe's railway companies to compete across borders, to guarantee basic passenger rights and to ensure that train drivers are fully qualified.
Po treh letih napornih pogajanj o treh povezanih zakonodajnih aktih, ki so potekala tako med samimi poslanci, kakor tudi med Parlamentom in Svetom ministrov za promet, so parlamentarci podprli določila za zagotovitev večje čezmejne konkurence in osnovnih pravic uporabnikov železniškega prevoza, vključno z nadomestili za zamude v mednarodnem prometu.
After three years' arduous negotiations among MEPs and between Parliament and the Council of transport ministers on three related pieces of legislation, Parliament advocated more cross-border competition, and also won a set of basic rights for rail users, including compensation for delays to international services.
Odločitev o tem, ali je tudi nacionalna železniška omrežja držav članic smiselno odpreti za konkurenco iz tujine, bo sprejeta kasneje, ob upoštevanju razmer na trgu.
A decision on whether to open up Member States' domestic rail networks to competition from abroad as well is to be taken later, in the light of market developments.
Svoboda zagotavljanja mednarodnih železniških storitev
Freedom to supply international rail services
Z letom leta 2010 bodo prevozniki lahko prosto zagotavljali mednarodne železniške storitve v potniškem prometu po celotni EU, potniki na vseh progah bodo upravičeni do minimalnih skupnih standardov kakovosti, strojevodje z evropskim spričevalom pa bodo lahko vozili v vseh omrežjih držav članic.
From 2010, operators will be free to supply international rail passenger services across borders within the EU (so Thalys and Eurostar could get competitors), passengers on all lines will be entitled to minimum service quality standards and a European licence will qualify train drivers to use any EU Member State's network.
Evropska komisija bo leta 2012 preverila izvajanje pravil ter ocenila, ali je smiselno predlagati razširitev liberalizacije tudi na nacionalna železniška omrežja.
The European Commission will review how the rules are going in 2012, and assess then whether to propose extending liberalisation to domestic networks.
Čeprav bodo mednarodne železniške storitve v potniškem prometu odprte za čezmejno konkurenco, pa domače ne bodo.
Although international passenger rail services will be opened to cross-border competition, domestic ones will not.
Januarja 2007 je namreč Parlament v drugem branju zavrnil predlog odbora za promet in ni določil datuma za liberalizacijo nacionalnih železniških storitev.
In a vote in second reading in January 2007, the full Parliament rejected the advice of its Transport Committee and decided not to set a date for the liberalisation of national rail services.
Pravice potnikov
Passenger rights
Z decembrom 2009, ko bo začela veljati evropska uredba o pravicah potnikov, bodo vsem potnikom v železniškem prometu, tako mednarodnem kot domačem, zagotovljene osnovne pravice, kot sta odgovornost prevoznika za prtljago in za prevoz osebe z omejeno mobilnostjo.
From 2009, when the EU passenger rights regulation takes effect, all rail passengers, international and domestic, will have basic rights, such as company liability for luggage and on transport for people with reduced mobility.
Te pravice so bile sprva predlagane le za potnike v mednarodnem prometu, vendar so jih poslanci po napornih pogajanjih s Svetom uspeli razširiti tudi na domače potnike.
These rights were originally proposed only for international passengers, but, after tough negotiations with the Council, MEPs succeeded in also extending them to domestic ones.
Pravila o nadomestilih
Compensation rules
Direktiva določa osnovna pravila za zaščito potnikov v železniškem prometu, podobna skupnim predpisom, ki že veljajo za letalske potnike.
The regulation lays down ground rules for protecting rail passenger rights similar to EU arrangements already in place for air passengers.
Nadomestila za zamude na mednarodnih povezavah, za katere bo odgovoren prevoznik, bodo znašala četrtino cene vozovnice v primeru zamude nad eno uro in polovico cene vozovnice za zamude, daljše od dveh ur.
On the railways, compensation for delays for which the railway company is responsible on cross-border services will be 25% of the fare for a delay of one hour or more and 50% for a delay of two hours or more.
Kadar bo zamuda daljša od ene ure, bo treba potnikom ponuditi brezplačna okrepčila in po potrebi nastanitev v hotelu oziroma, če bi vlak obtičal na progi, alternativni prevoz do železniške postaje.
If the delay exceeds one hour, and with certain restrictions on practicality, passengers must also be offered free refreshments and, if needed, hotel accommodation or transport from a stranded train.
Lažji dostop za invalide in kolesarje
Easier access for disabled people and cyclists
Ponudniki železniških storitev morajo invalidom in osebam z omejeno mobilnostjo olajšati dostop do postaj in peronov ter odstraniti vse ovire, ki otežujejo vstop in izstop z vlaka ter samo vožnjo z vlakom.
Companies must facilitate access to stations and platforms for people with disabilities or with reduced mobility, and remove all obstacles to getting on, off, or remaining on board.
Na postajah, kjer ni osebja, morajo sprejeti vse razumne ukrepe, da se jim zagotovi dostop do železniškega prevoza.
In unstaffed stations, companies "must take all reasonable measures" to ensure their access to rail transport.
Potnikom mora biti tudi dovoljeno, da na vlak vzamejo kolesa, če kompozicije to omogočajo.
Passengers must also be permitted to take bicycles on trains, provided that the rolling stock permits it.
Evropska spričevala za strojevodje
EU train driver's licence
Vsi strojevodje bodo morali pridobiti spričevalo o izpolnjevanju minimalnih pogojev glede zdravstvenih zahtev, osnovne izobrazbe in splošne strokovne usposobljenosti.
All train drivers will have to hold a certificate showing that they meet minimum educational and fitness requirements and professional skills.
Namen ukrepa je povečanje varnosti v železniškem prometu, hkrati pa strojevodjem omogočiti, da se lahko zaposlijo tudi v drugi državi članici.
This should enhance safety on EU railways, while making it easier for train drivers to work in another EU country.
Zahteve sprva ne bodo veljale za drugo vlakovno osebje, vendar je poslancem uspelo prepričati Komisijo, da se bo po začetku izvajanja direktive posvetila tudi temu vprašanju in po potrebi predložila zakonodajni predloge za osebje, ki opravlja varnostno zahtevne naloge.
These requirements will not apply to other train staff at first, but MEPs won an undertaking that the Commission will look into this within one year of the directive's entry into force and, if necessary, present a new proposal to include staff performing safety-critical tasks.
Varnost in interoperabilnost
Safety and interoperabili ty
Za prečkanje meje med članicama morajo vlaki izpolnjevati varnostna pravila obeh držav.
To be able to cross a border, trains must meet the safety rules of Member States on both sides.
Pravila si včasih nasprotujejo: v Italiji, na primer, so na vlakih dovoljeni le gasilni aparati s CO2 v prahu in ne z gasilno peno, medtem ko so v Avstriji varnostne zahteve ravno obratne.
These rules sometimes conflict - e.g. in Italy fire extinguishers on trains must contain CO2 powder and no foam, while Austria requires the reverse.
Železniški prevozniki, ki so hoteli izvajati mednarodne storitve, so zato morali za svoje vlake pridobiti odobritve v vsaki državi članici, kar je lahko trajalo tudi več let.
Rail companies wanting to supply international services have traditionally had to undergo approval procedures for their rolling stock in each Member State which can take years.
Julija 2008 je Parlament potrdil spremembe direktive o varnosti na železnici (2004/49/ES), s katerimi bo omogočeno, da za železniški vozni park, za katerega je že bilo izdano dovoljenje za obratovanje v eni državi članici, ne bo treba izdati dodatnega dovoljenja še v drugi članici.
In July 2008, Parliament approved an agreement with the Council of Ministers on EU-wide approval of different types of rolling stock, which will amend the Rail safety Directive (2004/49/EC) to ensure that any rolling stock already approved for use in one Member State must be accepted in the others.
Sporočilo za javnost Evropskega parlamenta Dodatno gradivo o zakonodajnem svežnju (v angleščini)
And (...) we will then also have an opportunity to reduce environmental pollution within the European Union."
Zavrnitev zakonodajnih predlogov v Parlamentu
And we shall not be voting for these proposals in the third reading. "
Evropski parlament gre lahko tudi korak dlje od dopolnjevanja zakonodajnih predlogov, ki se mu zdijo neustrezni.
Competition may be good for commerce, but you can leave us out, as we will deal with the economics of running our own service."
Če je predlog popolnoma nesprejemljiv in ne vidi možnosti, da bi ga uspešno izboljšali, ga lahko v celoti zavrne.
If a proposal is completely unacceptable and there is no prospect of making satisfactory improvements, it can be thrown out altogether.
V mandatnem obdobju 2004-2009 je Parlament v celoti zavrnil dva pomembna zakonodajna predloga: direktivo o patentiranju programske opreme in načrt za liberalizacijo pristaniških storitev.
In 2004-2009, for example, Parliament rejected outright two important legislative proposals: the so-called “software patents directive” and plans to liberalise port services.
Zavrnitev direktive o patentiranju programske opreme
No directive on software patents
Julija 2005 je Evropski parlament skoraj soglasno zavrnil direktivo, ki je postala znana kot direktiva o patentiranju programske opreme, in s tem končal tri leta trajajočo burno razpravo.
In July 2005, the European Parliament almost unanimously rejected, what had become known as the "software patents directive", ending three years of passionate debate.
Če bi bila sprejeta, bi direktiva omogočila patentiranje računalniško izvedenih izumov, ki se uporabljajo na računalnikih, v računalniškem omrežju ali podobni elektronski opremi.
If adopted, this directive would have allowed patenting of computer-implemented inventions (CIIs), i.e. those that use a computer, a computer network or similar equipment.
Konvencija o podeljevanju evropskih patentov omogoča podelitev patenta le, če je izum nov, predstavlja inovativen korak in je primeren za uporabo v industriji.
Under the European Patent Convention (which is not an EU law – it covers a wider area), a patent may be granted only if an invention is new, involves an inventive step and is capable of industrial application.
Podeljevanje patentov za računalniške programe - programsko opremo - pa je izrecno izključeno, ker so zaščiteni z avtorskimi pravicami.
Granting patents for computer programmes (i.e. software) is expressly ruled out – they are instead protected by copyright.
Vendar pa so Evropski patentni urad in nacionalni patentni uradi kljub temu podelili več tisoč patentov za izume, ki uporabljajo programsko opremo.
But thousands of patents for inventions that use software have been issued by the European Patent Office (EPO – not an EU body, it was created under the EPC) and national offices.
Primer takšnega patenta je metoda za nadzor pravilnega delovanja sistema proti blokiranju kolesnih zavor.
An example is a patent granted for a method of detecting whether an antilock brake system is functioning properly.
Programska oprema se šteje kot tehnični prispevek in jo je zato mogoče patentirati v skladu s pravili Evropskega patentnega urada.
In this case, the software is deemed to make a "technical contribution" and is thus patentable under EPO practice.
Patent ščiti tako izum (zavorni sistem) kot tudi programsko opremo, ki je del izuma.
In that case, the patent protects both the invention (the brake control system), and the software involved.
V praksi pa nacionalni patentni uradi različno tolmačijo pravila in patente Evropskega patentnega urada s tega področja.
In practice there has been wide variation in the ways in which national patent offices interpret there rules, and in how national authorities interpret EPO patents in this field.
Evropska komisija je zato predlagala direktivo, ki bi bolj jasno določala, kaj je moč patentirati in česa ne.
The European Commission proposed an EU directive to specify more clearly what was and was not patentable.
Računalniški velikani proti odprtokodni opremi
Big software firms vs. open source?
V Parlamentu je pred sprejemanjem predloga direktive potekalo intenzivno lobiranje.
There was intense lobbying of Parliament on this issue.
Na eni strani so bili večinoma predstavniki velikih proizvajalcev programske opreme, ki so zastopali stališče, da bi možnost patentiranja računalniško izvedenih izumov v Evropi spodbudila naložbe v razvoj in zaščitila evropske inovacije pred nepošteno konkurenco, zlasti iz ZDA, kjer je za podobne izume običajno lažje pridobiti patent.
One side, principally representing larger software firms, argued that making CIIs patentable in Europe would encourage research spending and protect European inventions from unfair competition, particularly from the US, where it is often easier to obtain patents on similar inventions.
Glasovanje ob prvi obravnavi ter dogajanje v Komisiji in Svetu
First reading vote and developments in Commission and Council
Ob prvi obravnavi, še pred volitvami leta 2004, se večina poslancev ni strinjala s predlagano opredelitvijo pojma "tehnični prispevek", ki po njihovem mnenju ni bila dovolj jasna.
At Parliament's first reading (which took place before the 2004 election) a majority of MEPs decided that the Commission's draft directive was insufficiently clear on the question of what constituted a "technical contribution".
Po volitvah leta 2004 je novi Parlament zahteval umik zakonodajnega predloga in pripravo novega, kar je Komisija zavrnila rekoč, da je Svet pred sprejemom svojega stališča, kar bo zadevo tako ali tako vrnilo v Parlament.
After the 2004 elections, the new Parliament requested to the Commission to withdraw its proposal and start afresh, but the Commission did not do so, arguing that the Council was on the point of adopting its position, which would put the ball back in Parliament’s court in any case.
Nekateri so menili, da je Svet možnosti patentiranja preveč skrčil glede na trenutno prakso v patentnih uradih, medtem ko so bili drugi prepričani ravno nasprotno: opredelitve omogočajo patentiranje programske opreme, le ime pojma je drugačno.
And Brian Crowley (IR) said on behalf of the UEN that without protection, "American companies, Japanese companies, or other companies will be patenting the very ideas that European software developers, European innovators, have come up with and forcing those same European innovators to have to buy them back."
Ker ni bilo možnosti za zadovoljiv kompromis, so se vse politične skupine strinjale, da je bolje ostati brez zakonodaje kot s slabo direktivo, zato so besedilo pri glasovanju zavrnile.
With no satisfactory compromise in prospect, the political groups could all agree that no law was better than a bad law, so they voted to reject the text.
Zavrnitev direktive o pristaniških storitvah
No directive on port services
Januarja 2008 je Parlament s 532 glasovi za, 120 proti in 25 vzdržanimi glasovi zavrnil predlog direktive o pristaniških storitvah, ki naj bi sicer po mnenju Komisije posodobila pristanišča in povečala obseg njihovega prometa, odprla pristaniške storitve, kot sta natovarjanje ali raztovarjanje ladij, za konkurenco in s preusmeritvijo na ladijski prevoz zmanjšala obremenjenost cestnega omrežja s tovornim prometom, obenem pa zagotovila spoštovanje varnostnih predpisov, delovna mesta in socialno varnost.
In January 2006, Parliament rejected - by 532 votes to 120 with 25 abstentions - a proposed port services directive, which the Commission had said sought to "modernise ports and increase their work volumes", open up port services (such as loading and unloading ships) to competition in line with the EU Treaty, and reduce congestion on the roads, while protecting safety, jobs and social security.
Pretovarjanje različnih vrst tovora zaposluje v EU na tisoče ljudi, zlasti na Nizozemskem, v Belgiji, Franciji in Veliki Britaniji.
Cargo handling employs thousands in the EU, particularly in the Netherlands, Belgium, France and the UK .