natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
PRAVICE ŽENSK IN ČLOVEKOVE PRAVICE: Kako bo Komisija pri vzpostavljanju agencije EU za človekove pravice vključila svojo politiko enakopravnosti spolov v politiko človekovih pravic, da bi izpostavila posebno kršenje človekovih pravic, ki ga doživljajo ženske?
WOMEN’S RIGHTS AND HUMAN RIGHTS: In the setting up of the new EU Human Rights Agency, how will the Commission implement a gender-sensitive approach to human rights policies in order to highlight the particular human rights violations suffered by women?
IZVAJANJE: Ali Komisija namerava pripraviti poročilo o izvajanju pekinških izhodišč za ukrepanje v Evropski uniji, vključno s podatki, razdeljenimi po spolu, kazalci in jasnim časovnim razporedom za njihovo izvajanje?
IMPLEMENTATION: Would the Commission consider drafting a report on the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in the European Union, including gender-segregated data, benchmarks and a clear timetable for its implementation?
Kaj namerava Komisija predlagati kot nadaljnjo strategijo na podlagi indikatorjev, ki so jih določila razna predsedstva EU?
What does the Commission propose as a follow-up strategy on the basis of the indicators set out by the various EU Presidencies?
UL C59 23.2.2001, str.
OJ C 59, 23.2.2001, p.
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0008/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0008/05
Zadeva: Financiranje politike ohranjanja narave in zlasti omrežja Natura 2000
Subject: Financing nature protection policy and especially Natura 2000
Da bi uresničili cilje omrežja, je potrebno zagotoviti primernost možnosti za financiranje, kot je poudarjeno v Sporočilu o financiranju programa Natura 2000 ( KOM(2004)0431 končno).
As is underlined in the Communication on financing Natura 2000 ( COM(2004)0431 final), it is important to ensure that the financial option for funding will be appropriate to secure the objectives of the network.
Kako lahko EK pojasni obstoječi politični razkorak med okoljskimi prednostnimi nalogami za obdobje 2007-2012, opredeljenimi v zgoraj omenjenem Sporočilu (in v Sporočilu o izvajanju akcijskih načrtov za ohranjanje biotske raznovrstnosti) na eni strani in nasprotovanjem Komisije glede oblikovanja finančnega instrumenta, posebej namenjenega financiranju omrežja Natura 2000, na drugi strani?
How can the EC explain the political gap existing between, on the one hand, the environmental priorities for the 2007-2012 period as defined in the above-mentioned Communication (and in the Communication on the implementation of the biodiversity action plans) and, on the other hand, the reluctance of the Commission to create a financial instrument specifically devoted to the financing of the Natura 2000 network?
Glede na to, da se bodo cilji v zvezi z ohranjanjem narave potegovali za sredstva veliko drugimi cilji iz regionalnih skladov in sklada za razvoj podeželja, kako lahko EK zagotovi, da bodo prednostni cilji za izboljšanje ohranjanja biotske raznovrstnosti bolje uresničeni z možnostjo integracije kot s pomočjo posebnega okoljevarstvenega sklada?
As nature protection objectives will be in competition with many other objectives under the Regional Funds and the Rural Development Fund, how can the EC ensure that priority objectives of improving protection of biodiversity will be better achieved through the integration option than by means of a specific environmental fund?
Ker so pretekle izkušnje pokazale, da uporaba strukturnih skladov ne primerno upošteva okoljevarstvenih ciljev, ali Komisija ne meni, da bi potrebovali posebni instrument oziroma, da je vsaj potrebno okrepiti predlog LIFE+, da bi povečali posebne možnosti financiranja za omrežje Natura 2000?
As past experience has shown that environmental objectives are not taken properly into account through the Structural Funds, does the Commission not think that there is a need for a specific instrument or, at least that the LIFE+ proposal should be reinforced, in order to strengthen the specific funding possibilities for Natura 2000?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0009/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0009/05
Zadeva: podvojitev proračunskih sredstev EU za raziskave
Subject: Doubling of EU budgetary resources for research
Odbor za industrijo, raziskave in energetiko poziva Evropsko komisijo k izjavi o tem, kako podvojiti proračunska sredstva EU za raziskave s financiranjem s pomočjo 7. okvirnega programa RTR.
The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy is calling for a European Commission statement on how a doubling of the EU budgetary resources for Research may be financed via the 7th RTD Framework Programme.
Ali se Evropska komisija zaveže, da bo predlagala in zagovarjala podvojitev proračunskih sredstev EU za raziskave?
Will the European Commission undertake to propose and defend a doubling of the EU budgetary resources for research?
V kakšnem obsegu naj bi se ta podvojitev financirala s pomočjo 7. okvirnega programa RTR (OP7)?
How may such a doubling be financed via the 7th RTD Framework Programme (FP7)?
Ali podvojitev proračuna okvirnega programa z vidika Komisije pomeni preprosto podvojitev sredstev začetnega proračuna OP6 ali pa se bodo v celoti upoštevali širitev, inflacija, trajanje OP7 ter morebitna dodana nova področja raziskav?
In the Commission’s view does a doubling of the framework programme budget amount to a simple doubling of the initial FP6 budget, or will it take full account of enlargement, inflation, the duration of FP7 and the possible addition of new areas of research?
Ali namerava Komisija v svojih prihodnjih predlogih OP7 povečati financiranje, da bi vključila podporo temeljnim raziskavam s strani Evropskega raziskovalnega sveta, vesoljske raziskave in raziskave varnosti v okvirnem programu, in ali za financiranje enega ali več teh področij raziskav predvideva mehanizme EU zunaj okvirnega programa?
In its forthcoming FP7 proposals, will the Commission increase funding so as to include support for basic research via a European Research Council, space research and security research within the framework programme, or does it envisage EU mechanisms outside the Framework Programme for the financing of one or more of these areas of research?
Kako bo Komisija (če bo eno ali več teh področij raziskav ostalo v okvirnem programu) zagotovila, da se bo financiranje krilo s proračunskimi sredstvi, ki bodo višja od sedanjih sredstev za raziskave?
If one or more of these areas remain within the framework programme, how will the Commission ensure that financing them will involve budgetary resources over and above existing research funding?
Kako bo Komisija skušala vplivati na razpravo, ki poteka o novem finančnem načrtu, da bo kolikor je mogoče zmanjšala tveganje, da ne bi dosegla cilja (ki ga deli s Parlamentom in številnimi državami članicami) podvojitve proračuna okvirnega programa?
How will the Commission try to influence the ongoing debate about the new financial perspective so as to minimise the chances of not achieving the objective, which it shares with Parliament and many Member States, of doubling the framework programme budget?
Ali Komisija meni, da bi za boljše usklajevanje planskih dejavnosti trajanje okvirnega programa moralo biti časovno usklajeno s trajanjem finančnega načrta?
Does the Commission believe that the duration of the Framework Programme should be synchronised with that of the financial perspectives so as to ensure that planning activities are better coordinated?
USTNO VPRAŠANJE Z RAZPRAVO O-0010/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0010/05
Zadeva: Neuspelo ponovno imenovanje Petra Hansena za generalnega komisarja UNRWA
Subject: Failure to re-appoint Peter Hansen as UNRWA Commissioner-General
Peter Hansen bo moral 31. marca zapustiti mesto generalnega komisarja UNRWA.
Peter Hansen is to leave his post as UNRWA Commissioner-General on 31 March.
Njegova odstavitev je po mnenju izraelskega časopisa Haaretz posledica kampanje, ki jo je vodil izraelski minister za zunanje zadeve - Shalom - ter konservativne stranke in judovski konservativni lobiji v ZDA.
According to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, his removal from office is the result of a campaign orchestrated by the Israeli Foreign Affairs Minister - Shalom - and by conservative groups and Jewish conservative lobbies in the USA.
Peter Hansen je res bil še posebej kritičen do izraelske politike rušenja palestinskih hiš in infrastrukture (ki je še posebej prizadelo begunce); to politiko opisuje kot hudo kršenje mednarodnega humanitarnega prava.
Peter Hansen has, indeed, been particularly critical of Israel's policy of demolishing Palestinian houses and infrastructure (which has a particular impact on refugees); he describes the policy as a serious contravention of international humanitarian law.
Sramotni napad na UNRWA je dosegel svoj višek v predvajanju videa, ki je prikazoval rešilne avtomobile ZN, ki so jih na območju Gaze uporabljali za prevoz izstrelkov.
The defamatory attack on UNRWA culminated in the broadcast of a video which showed UN ambulances being used to transport missiles in the Gaza Strip.
Predstavnica IDF (izraelskih oboroženih sil) Ruth Yaron je dejala, da prevažani predmet v resnici ni bil izstrelek.
The IDF [Israeli Army] spokeswoman Ruth Yaron has said that the object being transported was not actually a missile.
Kako se Svet v luči dejstva, da je bila EU leta 2004 glavna plačnica v proračun UNRWA (v katerega so Komisija in države članice prispevale 56%) odziva na poročila o pritiskih ZDA in izraelske vlade, da bi preprečile ponovno imenovanje Petra Hansena?
In view of the fact that, in 2004, the EU was the major contributor to the UNRWA budget (56% of which was provided by the Commission and the Member States), how does the Council react to the reports that the USA and the Israeli Government exerted pressure in order to prevent Peter Hansen from being re-appointed?
Ali ne bi bilo primerno, da bi Svet (v luči pomembnega dela, ki ga je pod njegovim vodstvom UNRWA opravila pri preskrbi s humanitarno pomočjo palestinskim beguncem ter položaja, ki ga je zavzel pri zagovarjanju pravic beguncev) takoj ukrepal za podporo ponovnemu imenovanju Petra Hansena?
In view of the important work carried out by UNRWA under his leadership in the provision of humanitarian assistance to Palestinian refugees throughout the Middle East and the stance which he has adopted in defending the rights of those refugees, does the Council not think that it should take prompt action in support of Peter Hansen's re-appointment?
USTNO VPRAŠANJE Z RAZPRAVO O-0011/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0011/05
Zadeva: neuspelo ponovno imenovanje Petra Hansena za generalnega komisarja UNRWA
Subject: Failure to re-appoint Peter Hansen as UNRWA Commissioner-General
Predstavnica IDF (izraelskih oboroženih sil) Ruth Yaron je dejala, da prevažani predmeti v resnici ni bil izstrelek.
The IDF [Israeli Army] spokeswoman Ruth Yaron has said that the object being transported was not actually a missile.
Kako se Komisija v luči dejstva, da je bila EU leta 2004 glavna plačnica v proračun UNRWA (v katerega so Komisija in države članice prispevale 56%) odziva na poročila o pritiskih ZDA in izraelske vlade, da bi preprečile ponovno imenovanje Petra Hansena?
In view of the fact that, in 2004, the EU was the major contributor to the UNRWA budget (56% of which was provided by the Commission and the Member States), how does the Commission react to the reports that the USA and the Israeli Government exerted pressure in order to prevent Peter Hansen from being re-appointed?
Ali ne bi bilo primerno, da bi Komisija (v luči pomembnega dela, ki ga je pod njenim vodstvom UNRWA opravila pri preskrbi s humanitarno pomočjo palestinskim beguncem na Bližnjem Vzhodu ter položaja, ki ga je Komisija zavzela pri zagovarjanju pravic beguncev) takoj ukrepala za podporo ponovnemu imenovanju Petra Hansena?
In view of the important work carried out by UNRWA under his leadership in the provision of humanitarian assistance to Palestinian refugees throughout the Middle East and the stance which he has adopted in defending the rights of those refugees, does the Commission not think that it should take prompt action in support of Peter Hansen's re-appointment?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0012/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0012/05
Zadeva: Pobuda EU o malariji
Subject: EU initiative on malaria
Za posledicami malarije letno umrejo trije milijoni ljudi.
Malaria kills three million people every year.
Zaradi te bolezni vsak mesec umre 150.000 otrok.
Every month 150 000 children will die because of malaria.
Govorimo o številki, ki je neposredno primerljiva s številko žrtev nedavnega cunamija, ki uživa pozornost celotnega sveta.
This figure can be directly compared with the number of victims of the recent tsunami, which caught the whole world's attention.
Prav bi bilo, da EU prevzame vodilno vlogo pri izvajanju ukrepov za boj proti tej bolezni in pri pridobivanju drugih strani za takojšnje delovanje.
The EU must take the lead and take steps to fight this disease and initiate a galvanising effect.
Kakšne konkretne pobude lahko sprejme EU na področju zbiranja sredstev ter ustreznih in celovitih ukrepov za obvladanje in izkoreninjenje te pandemične bolezni, s posebnim poudarkom na preventivi?
What concrete initiatives can the EU take in order to pool resources and launch appropriate and comprehensive measures to control and eradicate this pandemic in the long term, with particular emphasis on prevention?
Na kakšen način lahko spodbudi javne raziskave in spodbudi vlaganje privatnega sektorja ter na ta način da dodatno spodbudo raziskavam na področju cepiv?
How, in particular, can public research be increased and private sector investment be mobilised in order to accelerate research on vaccines?
USTNO VPRAŠANJE Z RAZPRAVO O-0013/05/rev.1
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0013/05/rev.1
Zadeva: Hramba podatkov
Subject: Data retention
Ali štiri države članice Francija, Velika Britanija, Irska in Švedska nameravajo umakniti okvirno direktivo o hrambi podatkov, če ji bo Komisija nasprotovala?
Do the four Member States, France, UK, Ireland and Sweden, intend to withdraw the framework directive on retention of data if the Commission opposes it?
Ali se Svet strinja z mnenjem, da trenutna okvirna direktiva glede na pravno osnovo spada v prvi in tretji steber?
Does the Council agree that the current framework directive has a legal basis that falls in the first as well as the third pillar?
Ali bodo navedene štiri države članice predlog umaknile, če bo Parlament okvirno direktivo zavrnil ?
Should Parliament decide to reject the framework directive, will the four Member States withdraw the proposal?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0014/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0014/05
Ali Komisija podpira okvirno direktivo o hrambi podatkov, kot jo predlagajo Francija, Velika Britanija, Irska in Švedska?
Does the Commission support the framework directive on retention of data as proposed by France, UK, Ireland and Sweden?
Če ne, ali bo Komisija navedene štiri države članice zaprosila, da umaknejo pobudo, in ali bo Komisija pripravila lasten predlog?
If not, will the Commission ask the four Member States to withdraw the initiative, and does the Commission intend to put forward a proposal on its own accord?
Kdaj bo Komisija pripravila dolgo pričakovani instrument hrambe podatkov po načelih tretjega stebra?
When will the Commission put forward the long-awaited third pillar data protection instrument?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0015/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0015/05
Zadeva: Pluralizem medijev
Subject: Media pluralism
Lanskemu poročilu Boogerda-Quaaka o svobodi izražanja in obveščanja je sledila objava podrobnega poročila Inštituta za medije (Düsseldorf), ki izraža zaskrbljenost glede pluralizma medijev v številnih državah članicah.
The Boogerd-Quaak report on freedom of expression and information of last year was followed by the publication of a detailed report by the European Institute for the Media (Düsseldorf), which expresses concern about media pluralism in a number of Member States.
Ali Komisija načrtuje pripravo zakonodajnega predloga o pluralizmu medijev na ravni EU, ki bi lahko dopolnil nacionalne sposobnosti presojanja in prispeval k razvoju svobode izražanja in izražanja različnih mnenj v EU?
Does the Commission plan to make a legislative proposal on pluralism of the media at EU level which could supplement national competencies and would contribute to the development of freedom of expression and the expression of the diversity of opinions in the EU?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0016/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0016/05
Zadeva: Alternativne oblike energije
Subject: Alternative forms of energy
Ali je Evropska komisija pripravljena s pogajanji skleniti prostovoljne sporazume z naftnimi podjetji, ki so dejavna na območju Evropske unije, in porabiti del "nepričakovanega dobička" zaradi naraščajoče cene nafte v raziskavah in razvoju alternativnih oblik energije?
Is the European Commission ready to negotiate with the oil companies active in the European Union area a voluntary agreement, to spend a part of the ‘windfall profits’ due to the rising oil price on research into and development of alternative forms of energy?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0017/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0017/05
Zadeva: Hramba in varovanje podatkov
Subject: Data retention and data protection
Kakšno stališče ima Komisija do osnutka okvirnega sklepa o hrambi podatkov, ki jih imajo ponudniki telekomunikacijskih storitev, kot ga predlagajo Francija, Velika Britanija, Irska in Švedska?
What is the Commission's position concerning the draft framework decision on data retention by telecom service providers as proposed by France, the UK, Ireland and Sweden?
Ali Komisija podpira vsebino tega predloga?
Does the Commission support the substance of that proposal?
Če ne, s katerimi konkretnimi točkami predloga se Komisija ne strinja?
If not, what are the specific points of the proposal on which the Commission disagrees?
Ali Komisija podpira izbiro pravne podlage iz tretjega stebra?
Does the Commission support the choice of a third-pillar legal basis?
Če Parlament zavrne osnutek okvirnega sklepa, ali bo Komisija od štirih držav članic zahtevala umik pobude in ali bo pripravila nov predlog?
Should the draft framework decision be rejected by Parliament, will the Commission ask the four Member States to withdraw the initiative, and will it put forward a new proposal?
Kdaj bo Komisija, kot je EP že nekajkrat zahteval,pripravila instrument, ki bi v tretjem stebru zagotovil enako raven zaščite, kot jo je v prvem stebru zagotovila Direktiva 95/46/ES ?
When will the Commission propose, in response to repeated requests from the EP, an instrument that would assure in the third pillar the same level of protection as provided in the first pillar by Directive 95/46/EC ?
UL L 281 z dne 23.11.1995, str.
OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p.
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0018/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0018/05
Zadeva: Prenos podatkov o potnikih
Subject: Transfer of passenger data (PNR)
Zakaj je bil 28. maja 2004 sporazum med ES in ZDA podpisan ne glede na običajno veljavne postopke, po katerih je potrebno soglasje Parlamenta?
Why was an international agreement between the EC and the US signed on 28 May 2004 without any respect for the normal procedures that would have required the assent of the Parliament?
Zakaj Komisija nadaljuje z izvajanjem sporazuma in se o podobnih sporazumih pogaja s tretjimi državami in mednarodnimi organi (ICAO), kljub postopku, ki ga je EP sprožil pred Sodiščem?
Why does the Commission continue to implement the agreement referred to above and continue to negotiate similar agreements with other third countries and international bodies (ICAO) in spite of the action brought by the EP before the Court of Justice?
Zakaj Parlamenta ne obvešča o pogajanjih?
Why has Parliament never been informed about such negotiations?
Katere pobude pripravlja Komisija v zvezi z začetkom izvajanja posebnega sistema "push"? (glej predlog spremembe EP k proračunu za leto 2005, postavka 06 02 04 02 (pravice potnikov).
What measures has the Commission taken to introduce a ‘push’ system? (see the EP amendment to the 2005 budget, line 06 02 04 02 (rights of passengers)).
Prosimo, če Komisija ob upoštevanju ukrepov, ki jih ZDA sprejemajo glede varovanja posredovanih podatkov, Parlament obvesti o naslednjem:
With regard to US undertakings on the protection of transferred data, could the Commission indicate:
na kateri stopnji izvajanja se nahajajo posamezni ukrepi ZDA?
the current state of implementation of each point of the undertakings?
do kakšne mere imajo organi ZDA dostop do podatkov o potnikih, ali obstaja način učinkovitega filtriranja občutljivih podatkov in ali so notranji evropski leti izvzeti?
the volume of passenger data traffic to which the US authorities have access, whether there is any effective filtering of sensitive data and whether intra-European flights are excluded?
koliko osumljenih teroristov je bilo identificiranih od začetka izvajanja sporazuma?
how many suspected terrorists have been identified since the implementation of the agreement?
ali so evropski potniki ustrezno obveščeni o prenosu podatkov in ali obstajajo učinkoviti načini za vnos popravkov v netočne podatke?
whether European passengers are correctly informed about the transfer of data and whether there are effective means of rectifying incorrect data?
ali so bili podatki o potnikih posredovani tretjim državam in, če so bili, v kakšnem obsegu?
whether passenger data has been transferred to third countries and, if so, how much?
če se je z ZDA začela pogajati o novem projektu, ki bi nadomestil "CAPPS II"?
whether it has opened negotiations with the US on the new project to replace ‘CAPPS II’?
UL C 61 E z dne 10.3.2004, str.
OJ C 61 E, 10.3.2004, p.
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0019/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0019/05
Na predstavitvi na temo hrambe podatkov pred Odborom LIBE 31. januarja bil predlog Francije, Velike Britanije, Švedske in Irske o hrambi podatkov ostro kritiziran.
At the hearing on data retention in the Committee on Civil Liberties of 31 January, France, the UK, Sweden and Ireland expressed strong criticisms of the proposal on data retention.
Predlagan način za doseganje cilja lahko naredi več škode kot koristi za poskuse že sedaj zelo zapletenega reševanja te problematike, predvsem če pomislimo na njegove daljnosežne in občutne gospodarske posledice za industrijo, pa tudi za uporabnike telekomunikacijskih in internetnih storitev.
The way in which the proposal seeks to achieve its aim could well do more harm than good in trying to solve the already complex management of the issue, especially when its far-reaching and substantial economic consequences for the industry, as well for consumers of telecom and internet services, are taken into account.
Izraženi so bili tudi resni dvomi o ustavnosti predloga.
Serious doubts have also been raised concerning the constitutional quality of the proposal.
Predlog ni v skladu s temeljnimi pravicami Unije, hkrati pa ni bila dokazana njegova učinkovitost.
It is clearly not in line with the fundamental rights of the Union, nor has its effectiveness been properly demonstrated.
Posamezni elementi tega občutljivega vprašanja se dotikajo različnih stebrov Pogodbe, predvsem prvega.
This delicate issue has elements falling under different pillars of the Treaty, especially the first pillar.
Če bi bil predlog podan pod okvirom prvega stebra, bi ga morala predložiti Komisija.
If this proposal should be brought forward under the first pillar, it should come from the Commission.
Kakšno je stališče Komisije do predloga Francije, VB, Švedske in Irske za okvirno direktivo o hrambi podatkov?
What is the Commission’s position on the proposal from France, the UK, Sweden and Ireland for a framework decision on data retention?
Bo predlog Komisije vključeval jasno razčlenitev stroškov, izhajajočih iz tega predloga, ki jih bodo najbrž utrpeli a) organi držav članic; in b) industrija?
Will the Commission proposal include a clear breakdown on the costs arising from this proposal which are likely to fall on (a) the authorities in the Member States; and (b) the industry?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0020/05
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0020/05