natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Pomanjkljiva preglednost in nesodelovanje z državami članicami EU, ki jih načrti zadevajo, zbujata skrb že v zgodnji razvojni fazi zaradi mogočih kršitev določb številnih mednarodnih konvencij o jedrski varnosti ter predstavljata nevarnost za morsko okolje na področju Baltskega morja.
The lack of transparency and cooperation with the EU Member States affected raises major concerns already at an early development phase as to possible violations of the provisions of numerous international conventions on nuclear safety and poses threats to the marine environment of the Baltic Sea area.
Evropski parlament je v resoluciji z dne 6. julija 2010 o strategiji Evropske unije za regijo Baltskega morja in vlogi makroregij v prihodnji kohezijski politiki poudaril, da morajo države članice EU upoštevati najstrožje varnostne in okoljske standarde in da mora Komisija spremljati in nadzorovati, ali sosednje države sledijo enakemu pristopu in mednarodnim konvencijam, in sicer zlasti tiste, ki načrtujejo gradnjo jedrskih elektrarn blizu zunanjih mej EU.
The European Parliament in its resolution of 6 July 2010 on the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the role of macro-regions in the future cohesion policy emphasised that EU countries have to follow the strictest safety and environmental standards and the Commission has to watch and monitor whether the same approach and international conventions are followed in neighbouring countries, especially in those that are planning to build nuclear power plants near external EU borders.
Ali se Komisija strinja, da EU in njene države članice nosijo skupno odgovornost za zagotavljanje in krepitev jedrske varnosti v obstoječih in prihodnjih jedrskih objektih tako v Evropski uniji kot v tretjih državah v njeni neposredni soseščini?
Does the Commission agree that the EU and its Member States have a joint responsibility to ensure and strengthen nuclear safety in the existing and future nuclear power facilities, both in the European Union and in the third countries in its close neighbourhood?
Ali Komisija razmišlja, da bi vprašanja jedrske varnosti vključila v zunanjo politiko s sosednjimi tretjimi državami?
Is the Commission considering including nuclear safety issues in its external policies with neighbouring third countries?
Ali Komisija v sodelovanju z Mednarodno agencijo za atomsko energijo in drugimi ustreznimi mednarodnimi organi načrtuje uporabo dodatnih instrumentov, ki bodo spodbujali varno širitev jedrske energije na zunanjih mejah EU?
Does the Commission plan to use any other instruments in cooperation with the IAEA and other relevant international bodies to facilitate safe nuclear expansion at the EU’s external borders?
Kako namerava Komisija zagotoviti nadzor takih jedrskih elektrarn na zunanjih mejah EU v sodelovanju z Mednarodno agencijo za atomsko energijo in drugimi ustreznimi mednarodnimi organi ter v skladu s konvencijo iz Espooja?
How will the Commission ensure monitoring of such NPPs at the EU’s external borders in cooperation with the IAEA, Espoo and other relevant international bodies?
Ali namerava Komisija zahtevati ponovno uradno oceno projektov, če ti ne bi ustrezali mednarodnim standardom?
Will the Commission seek an official reassessment of the projects, in case they fail international standards?
Ali bi po mnenju Komisije pravila EU za uvoz električne energije, na primer prepoved uvoza jedrske energije, ki ne dosega priznanih varnostnih standardov („umazana energija“), lahko postala aktivni vzvod za uveljavljanje najvišjih standardov varnosti in zanesljivosti jedrskih elektrarn zunaj EU?
In the Commission’s opinion, could the rules on EU electricity imports, such as banning imports of nuclear power which do not meet recognised safety standards (‘dirty power’), become an active leverage to implement the highest nuclear security and safety standards in NPPs outside the EU?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-000104/2011
Question for oral answer O-000104/2011
v imenu skupine EFD Zadeva: Evropske agencije na področju zaposlovanja in usposabljanja
on behalf of the EFD Group Subject: European employment and training agencies
EUROFUND, CEDEFOP, ETF in OSHA so evropske agencije, ki se ukvarjajo z različnimi vidiki istega področja: zaposlovanje in usposabljanje.
EUROFUND, CEDEFOP, ETF and OSHA are European agencies that deal with various aspects of the same area: employment and training.
Glede na sedanje razmere, ko se Evropa na eni strani spoprijema z deležem brezposelnih brez primere in na drugi z obdobjem akutnega finančnega pritiska zaradi proračuna, ki ne zadostuje za upravljanje zahtev po likvidnosti, ki jih nalagajo lizbonska pogodba, vojaška in humanitarna kriza v severni Afriki ter reševanje sistema gospodarskega upravljanja v nekaterih državah članicah, ali lahko Komisija sporoči, če je mogoče izvedeti število zaposlenih, kolikšni so skupni stroški upravljanja in vzdrževanja agencij, iz katerih virov se financirajo in v katerih sektorjih delujejo?
In view of the current situation in which Europe is having to tackle both unprecedented rates of unemployment and a period of acute financial stress due to a budget that is insufficient to manage the liquidity requirements imposed on the EU by the Treaty of Lisbon, by the war and humanitarian crisis in North Africa and by the bailout of the economic governance system in some Member States, can the Commission provide information on the number of employees, the overall cost of the management and maintenance of these agencies, their sources of funding and their spheres of action?
Kdo odloča o načrtovanju njihovih dejavnosti in kako?
Who decides on the programming of their activities and how?
Kakšne so možnosti sodelovanja z Evropskim parlamentom pri letnem načrtovanju dejavnosti?
What are the opportunities for interaction with the European Parliament in determining their annual programme of activities?
Katere so posebnosti vsake od štirih agencij, ki upravičujejo njihov soobstoj, ne da bi to pomenilo tveganje za neučinkovito in nepotrebno podvajanje stroškov?
For each of the four agencies, what are the distinguishing features which justify their coexistence without risking an inefficient and unnecessary duplication of costs?
Ali je mogoče predvideti združitev različnih struktur in s tem povečanje njihovih sinergij in učinkovitosti?
Would it be conceivable to group these agencies together in order to increase their synergies and improve efficiency?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-000105/2011
Question for oral answer O-000105/2011
v imenu skupine S&D Zadeva: Test izjemnih situacij v bančnem sektorju EU za leto 2011
on behalf of the S&D Group Subject: Stress tests of the EU banking sector in 2011
Testi izjemnih situacij, ki sta jih opravila Odbor evropskih bančnih nadzornikov in Komisija julija 2010 , niso uspeli povrniti zaupanja v bančni sektor EU.
The stress tests undertaken by the Committee on European Banking Supervision (CEBS) and the Commission in July 2010 failed to restore confidence in the EU banking system.
Pomanjkanje usklajenega čezmejnega pristopa je bil eden od razlogov, zakaj testi izjemnih situacij niso bili uspešni.
The lack of a harmonised cross-border approach was among the reasons why the stress tests were unsuccessful.
Vsaka država je na primer lahko odločila, katere banke morajo opraviti test izjemnih situacij, črni scenariji so bili prav tako različni in v številnih primerih se je izkazalo, da so bile posredovane informacije nepravilne.
For instance, each country could decide which banks should undergo the stress test, the adverse scenarios were also different and in many cases the information provided turned out to be incorrect.
Letošnje teste izjemnih situacij bo izvedel novoustanovljen evropski bančni organ, ki je objavil scenarije in metodologijo za svoje teste izjemnih situacij 18. marca.
This year's stress tests will be conducted by the newly created European Banking Authority, which released the scenarios and methodology for its stress tests on 18 March.
V primerjavi z lanskim letom so vidne nekatere izboljšave, vendar ali lahko Komisija za zagotovitev zaupanja v nov evropski finančni institucionalni okvir, pojasni:
There are some improvements compared to last year but, in order to ensure the credibility of the new European Financial institutional framework, can the Commission explain:
Katere so glavne spremembe, s katerimi bi preprečili, da bi se ponovil lanskoletni neuspeh pri izvajanju testa izjemnih situacij v bančnem sektorju?
What are the main changes to avoid a repetition of last year's failure of the banking stress test exercise?
Kako lahko Komisija jamči, da bodo stresni testi zajemali relevantna morebitna tveganja v vseh državah članicah?
How can the Commission guarantee that the stress tests will cover the relevant risk potential in all Member States?
Kako Komisija zagotovi pošten pristop do različnih bančnih struktur in poslovnih modelov v državah članicah?
How does the Commission ensure a fair approach to the different banking structures and business models across Member States?
V poročilu poslanke Evropskega parlamenta Ferreira je Evropski parlament pozval k strategiji za dokapitalizacijo in po potrebi k prestrukturiranju bank, ki se soočajo s težavami ( P7_TA(2010)0276 ); katere konkretne predloge bo Komisija pripravila v zvezi s tem in kdaj jih je mogoče pričakovati?
In the Ferreira report, the European Parliament called for a strategy to recapitalise and if necessary restructure banks which are facing problems ( P7_TA(2010)0276 ); what concrete proposals will the Commission make in this respect and when are they to be expected?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-000106/2011
Question for oral answer O-000106/2011
v imenu skupine ALDE Zadeva: Kriza v evropskem ribiškem sektorju zaradi porasta cen nafte
on behalf of the ALDE Group Subject: European fisheries sector crisis due to rise in oil prices
Stalno naraščanje cen goriva je še dodatno obremenilo številna podjetja v EU.
The continuing rise in fuel prices has put an additional burden on many businesses in the EU.
Visoke cene so še najbolj prizadele ribiče, predvsem zato, ker so viri za ribolov vedno manjši, obenem pa svoje ribiške proizvode prodajajo po nizkih cenah.
Notably EU fishermen suffer from these higher prices, mainly because they are dealing with an increasingly scarce resource and at the same time low prices paid for their fishery products.
Ali Komisija lahko pripravi podrobna stališča in predloge glede naslednjih vprašanj:
Can the Commission elaborate its views and proposals with regard to the following questions:
Kako rastoče cene goriva vplivajo na gospodarstvo in zaposlovanje v EU?
What effect does the rise in fuel prices have on the EU economy and on employment?
Katere panoge v EU so najbolj ogrožene, ker niso kos rastočim energetskim stroškom?
Which EU sectors are at greatest risk because they are unable to pass on their rising energy costs?
Kako lahko EU zagotovi nujno pomoč, ki dolgoročno ne bo izkrivila delovanje trga?
What kind of emergency help can the EU provide without creating long-term distortions?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-000107/2011
Question for oral answer O-000107/2011
v imenu skupine S&D Zadeva: Naraščajoče cene nafte in podpora ribičem
on behalf of the S&D Group Subject: Rising oil prices and support for fishers
V zadnjih dveh letih je porast cen nafte močno obremenil operativne stroške v ribiškem sektorju.
In the last two years the rise in oil prices has had a heavy impact on operating expenses in the fisheries sector.
Cena nafte je na začetku leta 2011 znašala več kot 100 USD za sod, medtem ko je bilo treba še na začetku leta 2009 zanj odšteti 37 USD.
The oil price increased from USD 37 in early 2009 to more than USD 100 at the beginning of 2011.
Nastalo zvišanje operativnih stroškov resno obremenjuje ribiče, zlasti male in priobalne ribiče ter tiste, ki delujejo iz oddaljenih pristanišč.
The resulting increased operational costs have put fishers under serious pressure, especially small-scale and artisanal coastal fishers and those operating from remote ports.
Komisija se je na zadnji vrhunec rasti cene nafte leta 2007 odzvala z uredbo de minimis , po kateri lahko države članice podjetjem v ribiškem sektorju v treh letih namenijo največ 30 000 EUR podpore.
The Commission reacted to the last oil price peak in 2007 with a de minimis regulation, allowing Member States to support fisheries enterprises up to a maximum of EUR 30 000 over three years.
Države članice lahko na podlagi te uredbe ublažijo naraščanje cene nafte.
This regulation permits Member States to alleviate the oil price increases.
Kako namerava Komisija pomagati evropskemu ribiškemu sektorju in ga podpreti ob naraščanju cen nafte ter glede na finančne težave, s katerimi se sedaj soočajo države z velikimi ribiškimi flotami?
How is the Commission planning to help and support the European fisheries sector in the context of rising oil prices and given the financial difficulties that countries with large fishing fleets are currently facing?
Kako Komisija ocenjuje rezultate sedanje uredbe de minimis glede na njene učinke na gospodarske razmere v evropskem ribištvu in morsko okolje?
How does the Commission assess the results of the current de minimis regulation as regards its impact on the economic situation of European fishers and the maritime environment?
Kako so jo uporabili v različnih državah članicah?
How has it been used by the different Member States?
Ali je Komisija še vedno prepričana, da je sedanja zgornja meja 30 000 EUR ustrezna ali pa bi jo bilo priporočljivo spremeniti na najvišji znesek, ki ne vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami ter ne predstavlja tveganja za izkrivljanje konkurence ali ne škodi okoljski in socialni trajnosti ter prizadevanjem v okviru Okvirne direktive o morski strategiji?
Does the Commission still consider the current ceiling of EUR 30 000 to be appropriate, or would it be advisable to change it to a maximum that does not affect trade between Member States, and does not threaten to distort competition or harm environmental and social sustainability and our commitments under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-000108/2011
Question for oral answer O-000108/2011
v imenu skupine PPE Zadeva: Razmere v Gorskem Karabahu
on behalf of the PPE Group Subject: Situation in Nagorno-Karabakh
V zadnjih mesecih smo opazili, da je bila večja količina orožja dostavljena iz Rusije v Armenijo in Azerbajdžan.
In recent months we have witnessed major arms supplies from Russia to Armenia and Azerbaijan.
To lahko povzroči napetost zlasti v okolici pokrajine Gorski Karabah in na celotnem južnem Kavkazu.
This may provoke increased tension especially around the Nagorno-Karabakh region and in the whole area of the South Caucasus.
Ali je visoka predstavnica/podpredsednica seznanjena s temi dogodki in ali spremlja razmere?
Is the HR/VP aware of these developments and monitoring this situation?
Kakšne ukrepe namerava sprejeti Evropska unija, da se prepreči morebitna zaostritev konflikta?
What steps does the European Union intend to undertake in order to prevent a potential escalation of the conflict?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-000109/2011
Question for oral answer O-000109/2011
v imenu Odbora za okolje, javno zdravje in varnost hrane Zadeva: Jedrska varnost 25 let po nesreči v Černobilu
on behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety Subject: Nuclear safety 25 years after the Chernobyl disaster
Aprila 2011 je minilo 25 let od jedrske nesreče v ukrajinskem Černobilu.
April 2011 marks the 25th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Ukraine.
26. aprila 1986 je zaradi nenadnega povečanja moči med testiranjem sistema počila reaktorska posoda, temu pa je sledila serija eksplozij.
On 26 April 1986 a sudden power output surge during a systems test caused a reactor vessel to rupture, leading to a series of blasts.
V černobilski jedrski elektrarni je 10 dni divjal močan požar.
An intense fire burned in the Chernobyl power plant for 10 days.
Ob tem se je sprostilo več kot 5,2 milijona terabekerelov.
More than 5.2 million terabecquerels were released.
Po podatkih Združenih narodov je kontaminacija zajela območja, od elektrarne oddaljena tudi do 500 km.
Contamination reached an area as far away as 500 km from the plant, according to the UN.
Evakuacijsko območje je obsegalo 30 km.
The evacuation zone reached 30 km.
Z območij okoli reaktorja je bilo evakuiranih približno 115.000 prebivalcev, po letu 1986 pa je bilo naknadno preseljenih še približno 220.000 prebivalcev Belorusije, Ruske federacije in Ukrajine.
About 115 000 people from areas surrounding the reactor were evacuated and some 220 000 people from Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine were subsequently relocated after 1986.
Dolgoročno je bilo do leta 2005 zabeleženih več kot 6000 primerov raka ščitnice pri otrocih in mladostnikih, ki so bili izpostavljeni v času nesreče, v naslednjih desetletjih pa lahko pričakujemo še več tovrstnih primerov.
In the long term, more than 6 000 cases of thyroid cancer had been reported up to the year 2005 in children and adolescents who were exposed at the time of the accident, and more cases can be expected during the next decades.
Poročilo Združenih narodov navaja, da je leta 2008 skupno število potrjenih smrti zaradi sevanja 64.
A UN report places the total confirmed number of deaths from radiation at 64 as of 2008.
O tem, kakšno bo končno število prizadetih, se še vedno krešejo mnenja.
Disputes continue about how many people will eventually be affected.
Nesreča je bila označena s stopnjo 7 – velika nesreča.
The catastrophe was rated at level 7 – a major accident.
EU je ustanovila Sklad za zaščitno zgradbo černobilskega reaktorja, s čimer je največja donatorica finančne pomoči za boj proti posledicam Černobila.
The EU, as a creator of the Chernobyl Shelter Fund, was the largest provider of financial assistance for fighting the consequences of Chernobyl.
Ne le, da je nesreča v Černobilu že povzročila precejšnje število žrtev, še dolga leta bodo njene posledice za zdravje katastrofalne.
The Chernobyl accident has not only already caused a considerable number of casualties, but will still have disastrous effects on health for years to come.
Nedavne študije kažejo, da v vsaj dveh ukrajinskih okrožjih prebivalci še vedno jedo kontaminirano hrano.
According to recent studies, residents of at least two Ukrainian districts continue to eat contaminated food.
Mednarodna skupina izvedencev, ki jo je ustanovila Komisija ( http://arch.iarc.fr ), je nedavno zaključila pregled stanja zdravstvenih raziskav, povezanih s Černobilom.
An international group of experts funded by the Commission (http://arch.iarc.fr) has recently completed a review of the status of Chernobyl health research.
Današnje splošne razmere na tem področju je mogoče opisati kot skupek neusklajenih študij, od katerih je vsaka koristna, vendar predstavlja zgolj krpanko in ne celovitega strukturiranega poskusa orisati vse zdravstvene posledice te nesreče.
They describe the overall picture currently as ‘a series of uncoordinated studies, valuable in themselves but forming a patchwork rather than a comprehensive, structured attempt to delineate the overall health consequences of the accident.’
Svetujejo čimprejšnjo pripravo mednarodne študije o posledicah Černobila.
They advise that an international study should be set up on the effects of Chernobyl as soon as is possible.
– Ali je Komisija pripravljena začeti in dolgoročno (glede na celotno življenjsko dobo posameznikov) podpirati študijo, ki bo ocenila splošne posledice za zdravje evropskega prebivalstva na vseh področjih, ki so jih prizadele radioaktivne padavine iz Černobila?
– Is the Commission prepared to set up and support a long-term (life span) study to assess the overall consequences on the human health of the European population in all the areas affected by the Chernobyl fallout?
– Ali ima Komisija podatke o sedanjem stanju kontaminacije tal in okolja na področju Černobila in najbolj prizadetih področjih Belorusije, Ukrajine in Rusije ter o ukrepih, sprejetih za zaščito ljudi pred njo?
– Does the Commission have data on the current state of land and environmental contamination in the Chernobyl area and the most affected areas in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia, and the measures taken to protect humans against it?
– Ali namerava Komisija sodelovati z Ukrajino, da bi se čez prizadeto jedrsko elektrarno v Černobilu zgradil nov ščit proti kontaminaciji?
– Does the Commission intend to cooperate with Ukraine in order to construct a new contamination shield over the top of the stricken Chernobyl nuclear plant?
– Ali namerava Komisija ob bližajoči se 25. obletnici spodbuditi vlade k javni objavi novih finančnih zavez, ki jih bodo namenile boju proti posledicam te jedrske nesreče?
– With the 25th anniversary approaching, will the Commission encourage governments to make public new cash commitments helping to fight the consequences of the nuclear accident?
Jedrske nesreče nas presenetijo, zgodijo se nepričakovano, pred 25. leti Černobil, Fukušima pa pred zgolj nekaj tedni.
Nuclear incidents strike by surprise and unexpectedly; Chernobyl 25 years ago, Fukushima just a few weeks ago.
Obe nesreči kažeta, da so lahko za lokalno prebivalstvo in prebivalstvo v regiji posledice hude.
Both accidents show that the consequences on the local and regional population can be severe.
Glede na število in razporejenost jedrskih elektrarn v Evropi je učinkovita zaščita prebivalcev (ki vključuje med drugim tudi evakuacijske ukrepe) seveda čezmejno vprašanje, pa če se nam zdi jedrska nesreča še tako neverjetna.
Given the number and location of the nuclear facilities in Europe, effective protection (including inter alia evacuation measures) of the population is clearly a cross-border issue – however unlikely a radiological incident may appear to us.
Zato bi rad vprašal naslednje glede sedanje ravni usklajenosti v EU:
Regarding the current level of coordination in the EU:
– S kakšnimi scenariji o možnih posledicah, ki bi jih imela resna jedrska nesreča v kateri izmed jedrskih elektrarn (v EU ali njeni soseščini) za prebivalstvo v različnih državah članicah, je Komisija seznanjena?
– What possible scenarios for the effect a serious nuclear accident at a given site (in the EU or nearby) would have on the population in different Member States is the Commission aware of?
– Kakšne informacije ima Komisija o usklajevanju civilne zaščite med državami članicami ter med EU in tretjimi državami, na primer o skupnih vajah za primere radiološke nezgode?
– What information does the Commission have on civil protection coordination between Member States and between the EU and third countries, such as joint exercises for the case of a radiological incident?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-000110/2011
Question for oral answer O-000110/2011
v imenu skupine ALDE Zadeva: Prenova madžarske ustave
on behalf of the ALDE Group Subject: Revised Hungarian Constitution
18. aprila 2011 je madžarski parlament potrdil besedilo nove madžarske ustave, ki jo je predsednik republike podpisal 25. aprila 2011, veljati pa bo pričela 1. januarja 2012.
On 18 April 2011 the Hungarian Parliament approved the text of the new Hungarian Constitution, which was signed by the President of the Republic on 25 April 2011 and is to enter into force on 1 January 2012.