natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
– je po ocenah Evropskega združenja za tekstilno in oblačilno industrijo (EURATEX) v tem sektorju med letoma 2002 in 2009 brez dela ostalo 1,2 milijona delavcev oziroma 40 % zaposlenih, vrednost tekstilne industrije v EU pa je padla za 37 %;
– According to an analysis carried out by Euratex (the European Apparel and Textile Organisation), between 2002 and 2009 the textile industry in the EU shed 1.2 million employees, or 40% of its workforce, while its assets fell by 37%.
– je vrednost sektorja še vedno približno 99,4 milijard EUR;
– Despite this, its total assets currently stand at approximately EUR 99.4 billion.
– je v istem obdobju zaradi uvoza tekstilnih izdelkov iz drugih držav Evropska unija ostala brez 616.000 delovnih mest.
– Over the same period, the textile sector in the EU lost 616 000 jobs, thanks to textile imports from third countries.
Ali priznava, da uvoz pakistanskih tekstilnih izdelkov in oblačil, proizvedenih v podjetjih, ki jih delo otrok ne skrbi preveč in ne krijejo stroškov, povezanih s socialno zaščito delavcev, varovanjem okolja ali kakovostjo uporabljenih surovin, podira običajna tržna pravila v okoliščinah, ki jih ne bi vzdržalo nobeno evropsko podjetje?
Does the Commission recognise or not that the entry of textile and clothing products from Pakistan, produced by companies which have no particular anxieties over child labour, and contribute virtually nothing towards their workers' welfare, the protection of the environment or the quality of their raw materials, would subvert the existing general market rules and create conditions which no European company would be able to handle?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0130/2010
Question for oral answer O-0130/2010
v imenu skupine Verts/ALE Zadeva: Podpora rehabilitaciji žrtev mučenja v EU
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group Subject: Support within the EU for the rehabilitation of torture victims
EU je potrdila odločitev o postopni ukinitvi financiranja rehabilitacijskih centrov v EU z obrazložitvijo, da je ustrezna proračunska vrstica prešla v okvir EIDHR, ki je instrument zunanje dejavnosti.
The EU has confirmed its decision to phase out the funding of EU-based rehabilitation centres, on the basis that the relevant budget line came under the EIDHR, which is an external action instrument.
Čeprav je v strateškem dokumentu navedeno, da bi morale države članice prevzeti večjo odgovornost glede financiranja, direktiva o sprejemu (2003/9/ES ) jasno navaja, da gre za obveznost (člen 15(2) o zdravstveni pomoči).
While the strategy paper indicates that the Member States ‘should’ assume greater financial responsibility, the Reception Directive (2003/9/EC ) clearly states that this is an obligation (in Article 15(2) on health care).
Študija, ki so jo izvedli pri akademski mreži Odysseus , pa je izpostavila, da le nekatere države članice zagotavljajo podporo, ki je potrebna za rehabilitacijo žrtev mučenja v njihovi državi, v mnogih državah pa je ta podpora nezadostna ali pa je ni.
Nevertheless, as underlined in a study carried out by the Odysseus Academic Network , few Member States provide the necessary support for torture rehabilitation needs in their own country, with many offering little or no support.
In končno, sklad je slabo upravljan, zato prihaja do velikih zamud pri izvajanju izplačil.
In extreme cases, these delays have resulted in projects ceasing to operate.
Posledica vsega tega je, da rehabilitacijski centri za žrtve mučenja v EU kmalu ne bodo več imeli dostopa do trajnostnega financiranja, kar bo v škodo žrtev mučenja, za katere ne bo mogoče zagotoviti primerne oskrbe.
As a result, EU-based rehabilitation centres for victims of torture will soon no longer have access to sustainable funding, to the detriment of torture victims themselves, who will not be able to secure appropriate care.
Kako torej namerava Komisija zagotoviti trajno podporo rehabilitaciji žrtev mučenja v EU?
How, therefore, does the Commission intend to ensure continued support for the rehabilitation of torture victims within the EU?
Ali se Komisija v zvezi s tem in v luči obveznosti, ki jih nalaga Listina o temeljnih pravicah v EU, strinja, da je treba za dejavnosti rehabilitacije v EU oblikovati novo proračunsko postavko, ki bo tej dejavnosti zagotovila trajnostno dolgoročno financiranje?
In this connection, and in the light of its obligations under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, does the Commission agree that a new budget line needs to be created for rehabilitation activities within the EU in order to ensure sustainable long-term funding?
Če ne, kako namerava zagotoviti, da bodo države članice izpolnjevale obveznosti, ki jih glede financiranja teh dejavnosti določa zakonodaja Evropske unije?
If not, how does it intend to ensure that the Member States fulfil their obligations under EU law to fund such activities?
Strateški dokument EIDHR 2011-2013.
EIDHR Strategy Paper 2011-2013.
UL L 31, 6.2.2003, str.
OJ L 31, 6.2.2003, p.
Evropski sklad za begunce
European Refugee Fund.
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0131/2010
Question for oral answer O-0131/2010
v imenu Odbora za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve Zadeva: Revizija pravil o konkurenci za horizontalno sodelovanje
on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs Subject: Review of the competition horizontal cooperation rules
Uredbi o skupinskih izjemah, tako tista za specializacije (Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 2658/2000 ) kot tista za raziskave in razvoj (Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 2659/2000 ), prenehata veljati 31. decembra 2010.
Both the current specialisation (Commission Regulation (EC) No 2658/2000 ) and R&D (Commission Regulation (EC) No 2659/2000 ) block exemption regulations will expire on 31 December 2010.
Komisija namerava sprejeti dve novi uredbi o skupinskih izjemah, da bi ju nadomestila, in nekaj smernic, s katerimi bi zainteresiranim stranem pomagala analizirati in razumeti, ali so njihovi sporazumi o sodelovanju skladni s pravili o konkurenci, in sicer s členom101(3) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije.
The Commission intends to adopt two new block exemption regulations to replace them and some guidelines to help the stakeholders analyse and understand if their cooperation agreements are compatible with the competition rules, namely Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Komisija poleg tega, v nasprotju s prejšnjo kritično oceno kupne moči v sektorju trgovine na drobno, sedaj na splošno pozdravlja sporazume o skupni nabavi.
Moreover, contrary to a formerly critical evaluation of buying power of the retail sector, the Commission now generally welcomes joint purchasing agreements.
Kateri so natančno prispevki zainteresiranih strani, pridobljeni med procesom posvetovanja, ki jih namerava Komisija vključiti v končni zakonodajni okvir?
Which specific contributions received from stakeholders during the consultation process does the Commission intend to incorporate in the final legislative framework?
Ali je Komisija analizirala, ali bi imele zainteresirane strani koristi od sprejetja novih posebnih uredb o skupinskih izjemah, ki bi zajemale druge vrste horizontalnih sporazumov poleg specializacije ter raziskav in razvoja?
Did the Commission analyse whether stakeholders would benefit from the establishment of new specific block exemption regulations to cover other particular types of horizontal agreements other than specialisation and R&D?
Ali bi se ji zdelo koristno pripraviti osnutke novih uredb o skupinskih izjemah na področju horizontalnega sodelovanja?
Would the Commission consider it useful to draft new block exemption regulations in the horizontal cooperation area?
Ali Komisija namerava reševati težavo tako imenovane patentne zasede v okviru osnutkov novih uredb ali meni, da bi bila za preprečevanje zlorab patentov potrebna dopolnilna zakonodaja, prilagojena sektorjem?
Does the Commission intend to tackle the problem of patent ambush in the framework of the new draft regulations or does it consider that complementary sector-specific legislation would be necessary to avoid abuse of patent rights?
Ali je Komisija predana zagotavljanju združenega zakonskega okvira med pravili o konkurenci in zakonodajo za posamezne sektorje na področju pravic intelektualne lastnine?
Is the Commission committed to ensure an integrated legislative framework between competition rules and sector-specific legislation in the area of intellectual property rights?
Katere posebne odločitve ali poravnave v zadevah je Komisija uporabila pri razvoju osnutkov svojih novih pravil?
Which specific decisions or case settlements did the Commission use to develop its new draft rules?
V kakšni meri se je pri razvoju osnutkov novih pravil oprla na izkušnje nacionalnih organov za konkurenco iz EU in mednarodnih organov za konkurenco?
How much did the Commission also build on the experience of EU national competition authorities and international competition authorities to develop the new draft rules?
Ali je gospodarska kriza kakorkoli vplivala na sodelovanje med organi za konkurenco po svetu v procesu priprave nove zakonodaje?
Did the economic crisis have any impact on cooperation between competition authorities worldwide in the process of drafting new legislation?
Ali se na področju politike konkurence razvija kakršnokoli ”globalno upravljanje“ na ravni Mednarodne mreže za konkurenco ali katerega drugega foruma?
Is there any ‘global governance’ developing in the area of competition policy at the level of the International Competition Network or any other forum?
Kako namerava Komisija pri reviziji osnutka razrešiti protislovje v svoji oceni nabavnih zadrug in istočasno upoštevati pobude Parlamenta na tem področju?
In the revision of the draft, how does the Commission intend to resolve the contradiction in its assessment of purchasing cooperatives and at the same time take into consideration the initiatives of the Parliament in this area?
UL L 304, 5.12.00, str.
OJ L 304, 5.12.2000, p.
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0132/2010
Question for oral answer O-0132/2010
v imenu skupine ECR Zadeva: Protidampinški primeri - stanje in obeti
on behalf of the ECR Group Subject: Anti-dumping cases - state of play and prospects
Evropski parlament se strinja s stališčem Evropske komisije, da bi bilo treba v okviru liberalizacije mednarodne trgovine zaščito evropske proizvodnje pred izkrivljanji mednarodne trgovine, kot je na primer damping, obravnavati kot prvino strategije odprtega in poštenega trgovanja.
The European Parliament shares the European Commission's view that, in the context of the liberalisation of international trade, the defence of European production against international trade distortions such as dumping should be considered as a component of an open and fair trade strategy.
Ali lahko Komisija Evropskemu parlamentu poda splošen pregled in stališče glede sedanjih primerov?
Can the Commission give the EP a general outlook, and comment on the ongoing cases?
Ali lahko Komisija zagotovi, da bo končna odločitev vedno utemeljena s tehničnimi in dejanskimi prvinami?
Can the Commission ensure that the final decision will always be founded on technical and factual elements?
Kako namerava Komisija preprečiti katerikoli pretiran pritisk zainteresiranih strani med preiskavo instrumenta trgovinske zaščite?
How does the Commission propose to counteract any undue pressure from stakeholders during trade defence instrument investigation?
Ali se Komisija zaveda, da poskušajo tretje države vplivati na stališče držav članic v protidampinškem odboru?
Is the Commission aware of third countries trying to influence Member States concerning their position in the anti-dumping committee?
Kako lahko Komisija glede na sedanja pravila STO in EU zagotovi, da bo protidampinški instrument trgovinske zaščite vedno učinkovito in ustrezno sredstvo za odziv na izkrivljeno delovanje trga in bo vedno odpravil skrbi evropske industrije glede nepoštene konkurence?
Having regard to the current WTO and EU rules, how can the Commission ensure that the trade defence instrument of anti-dumping will always be an efficient and appropriate tool to react to the distortions of the market and will always match the concerns of EU industry on unfair competition?
Kako lahko EU malim in srednjim podjetjem pod enakimi pogoji, kot ga imajo večja podjetja, zagotovi zajamčen dostop do instrumentov trgovinske zaščite?
How can the EU ensure that access to TDIs is guaranteed to SMEs, on an equal footing with bigger companies?
Kakšen je njegov vpliv na konkurenco v EU in kako vpliva na mala in srednja podjetja?
What is its impact on competition in the EU, and how does it affect SMEs?
Kako namerava Komisija z vidika Lizbonske pogodbe vključiti Evropski parlament v protidampinške in protisubvencijske preiskave in mu v zvezi z njimi zagotoviti vse informacije?
How does the Commission intend to involve, and provide full information to, the EP in anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations in the light of the Lisbon Treaty?
Kdaj in kako namerava Komisija predložiti ustrezne predpise v skladu s Pogodbo in novimi pooblastili, podeljenimi Evropskemu parlamentu na področju avtonomnih trgovinskih ukrepov?
When and how does the Commission intend to put forward relevant regulations in line with the Treaty and the new powers granted to the EP in the area of autonomous trade measures?
Naši večji in manjši poslovni partnerji vedno pogosteje uporabljajo ta instrument proti izvozom iz EU.
The instrument is used more and more by our major and minor commercial partners against EU exports.
Ali bo Komisija podala svoje stališče glede tega specifičnega vprašanja in poudarila, kako namerava postopati proti ukrepom, ki bodo kršili pravila STO?
Will the Commission express its opinion on this specific matter and point out how it intends to tackle such actions, should they breach WTO rules?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0133/2010
Question for oral answer O-0133/2010
v imenu skupine ALDE Zadeva: Globe Komisije v protimonopolnih zadevah
on behalf of the ALDE Group Subject: Commission fines in antitrust cases
Komisija je v zadnjih letih zavzela zelo odločno stališče do protikonkurenčnega ravnanja.
The Commission has taken a very firm stance on anti-competitive behaviour in recent years.
To velja pozdraviti, saj takšno ravnanje povzroča veliko škodo potrošnikom in gospodarstvu.
This is to be welcomed, since anti-competitive behaviour causes great harm to consumers and to the economy.
Bilo je govora, da je uporaba vedno višjih glob nemara preveč okoren instrument, nenazadnje zaradi morebitnih izgub delovnih mest, ki bi bile posledica nezmožnosti plačila.
It has been argued that the use of ever-higher fines may be too blunt an instrument, not least in terms of potential job losses as a result of the inability to pay.
Glede na trenutno finančno krizo v Evropi je sedaj bolj kot kdajkoli pomembno imeti učinkovite protimonopolne ukrepe za kar največje možno odvračanje.
In view of the current financial crisis in Europe, it is now more important than ever to have effective anti-trust measures in place for maximum deterrence.
Parlament je v svoji resoluciji o poročilu o konkurenčni politiki za leto 2008 zato pozval, naj se razvije širša paleta bolj prefinjenih instrumentov na področju protimonopolnih pravil, ki bodo zajemala vprašanja, kot so individualna odgovornost, preglednost in odgovornost podjetij, krajši postopki, pravica do zagovora in predpisanega postopka, mehanizmi za zagotavljanje učinkovite obravnave prošenj za popustljivost (zlasti za preseganje motenj, ki jih povzročajo postopki odkrivanja v ZDA), podjetniški programi za zagotavljanje skladnosti in razvoj evropskih standardov.
Parliament, in its resolution on the Report on Competition Policy 2008, has therefore called for the development of a wider range of more sophisticated instruments in the area of antitrust rules, covering such issues as individual responsibility, transparency and accountability of firms, shorter procedures, the right of defence and due process, mechanisms to ensure the effective operation of leniency applications (in particular to overcome the interference caused by discovery processes in the USA), corporate compliance programmes and the development of European standards.
Ali namerava Komisija razviti širšo paleto bolj prefinjenih instrumentov na področju protimonopolnih pravil, kot je Parlament izrecno zahteval?
Does the Commission intend to develop a wider range of more sophisticated instruments in the area of antitrust rules, as explicitly requested by Parliament?
Ali lahko natančno navede, kolikšno škodo – v denarnih zneskih – so karteli v zadnjih desetih letih povzročili gospodarstvu in potrošnikom?
Could it indicate exactly how much damage – in monetary terms – has been done to the economy and to consumers by cartels over the last 10 years?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0134/2010
Question for oral answer O-0134/2010
v imenu skupine EFD Zadeva: Izvorne celice, pridobljene iz krvi popkovine
on behalf of the EFD Group Subject: Cord blood stem cells
Državljani EU se vedno bolj proaktivni in želijo biti obveščeni na kar se da osebni ravni o najboljših možnostih zdravljenja in zdravilih.
EU citizens are becoming increasingly proactive, seeking to be constantly informed, as far as possible on a personalised basis, about the best treatments and medicines available.
V zvezi s tem je bilo dokazano, da so hematopoetske (krvne) izvorne celice zelo učinkovite pri zdravljenju številnih bolezni, ki povzročajo invalidnost, ter v številnih kliničnih poskusih, ki trenutno potekajo.
In this context, hematopoietic (blood) stem cells have been proven to be very effective in treating several disabling diseases and a large number of clinical trials are currently in progress.
Za razliko od pridobivanja drugih izvornih celic je pridobivanje iz krvi popkovine neboleče za mater in otroka, je pa bogat vir mladih nespremenjenih izvornih celic.
Unlike with other stem cells, the collection of umbilical cord blood stem cells is painless for mother and child and also offers an important source of young, undifferentiated stem cells.
Zrele izvorne celice, pridobljene iz krvi popkovine, pa se lahko pridobijo samo enkrat, in to je ob rojstvu.
However, there is only one opportunity to collect these adult cord blood stem cells, which is at birth.
Trenutno se v Evropi ob rojstvu nabere manj kot 1 % teh celic.
Currently, in Europe, less than 1% of stem cells at birth are collected.
Če upoštevamo zadnji napredek znanosti na področju zdravljenja s celicami, regenerativne medicine ter pravice državljanov EU, da se odločajo o zdravju na temelju objektivnih in nepristranskih informacij, kako namerava Komisija izboljšati informiranje staršev o prednostnih izvornih celic, pridobljenih iz krvi popkovine, in o izbiri, ki jo imajo ob rojstvu otroka?
In view of the latest research advances in cell therapy and regenerative medicine and of EU citizens’ right to make health-related decisions based on objective and impartial information, how is the Commission planning to improve the provision of information to parents about the advantages of cord blood stem cells and about the choices they have at their child’s birth?
Kakšni so tudi načrti Komisije za zagotavljanje skladnega izvajanja Direktive 2004/23/ES o določitvi standardov kakovosti in varnosti, darovanja, pridobivanja, testiranja, predelave, konzerviranja, shranjevanja in razdeljevanja človeških tkiv in celic, da bi se zagotovile enake pravice in standardi za vse sedanje in prihodnje paciente v EU?
Furthermore, what is the Commission planning to do to ensure uniform transposition of Directive 2004/23/EC on setting standards of quality and safety for the donation, procurement, testing, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells, in order to facilitate equal rights and standards for all EU patients and parents-to-be ?
UL L 102, 7.4.2004, str.
OJ L 102, 7.4.2004, p.
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0135/2010
Question for oral answer O-0135/2010
v imenu Odbora za industrijo, raziskave in energetiko Zadeva: Konferenca o podnebnih spremembah v Cancúnu (COP16)
on behalf of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy Subject: The climate change conference in Cancún (COP16)
Katere konkretne zunanje ukrepe načrtuje Svet, da bi obnovil zaupanje v pogajalski proces pred konferenco o podnebnih spremembah v Cancúnu in med njo (kar zadeva oba tira pogajanj, torej drugo ciljno obdobje kjotskega protokola 2013–2020 in dolgoročne ukrepe za sodelovanje do leta 2050)?
Which are the concrete external actions the Council is planning to take in order to re-establish trust in the negotiating process prior to and during the climate conference in Cancún (as regards both negotiating strands, i.e. the Kyoto Protocol’s second commitment period 2013-2020 and long-term cooperative action up to 2050)?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0136/2010
Question for oral answer O-0136/2010
Katere konkretne zunanje ukrepe načrtuje Komisija, da bi obnovila zaupanje v pogajalski proces pred konferenco o podnebnih spremembah v Cancúnu in med njo (kar zadeva oba tira pogajanj, torej drugo ciljno obdobje kjotskega protokola 2013–2020 in dolgoročne ukrepe za sodelovanje do leta 2050)?
Which are the concrete external actions the Commission is planning to take in order to re-establish trust in the negotiating process prior to and during the climate conference in Cancún (as regards both negotiating strands, i.e. the Kyoto Protocol’s second commitment period 2013-2020 and long-term cooperative action up to 2050)?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0137/2010
Question for oral answer O-0137/2010
v imenu skupine Verts/ALE Zadeva: Kriminalizacija stikov med institucijami EU in zagovornikov človekovih pravic v Tuniziji
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group Subject: Criminalisation of contacts between EU institutions and human rights defenders in Tunisia
Tunizijski parlament je 15. junija 2010 sprejel novo spremembo člena 61a kazenskega zakonika, ki obravnava kršenje tunizijske zunanje varnosti.
The Tunisian Chamber of Deputies adopted on 15 June 2010 a new amendment to Article 61a of the Penal Code, which deals with violations of Tunisia’s ‘external security’.
Člen 61a trenutno kriminalizira stike „z agenti tujih sil, da bi se spodkopale vojaške ali diplomatske razmere v Tuniziji“.
Article 61a currently criminalises contacting ‘agents of a foreign power to undermine the military or diplomatic situation in Tunisia’.
Tunizijci so lahko za to kaznivo dejanje obsojeni na 20 let zapora z minimalno kaznijo petih let.
Tunisians convicted of this crime face up to 20 years in prison, with a minimum sentence of five years.
Nova zakonodaja določa, da bo kaznovan vsak Tunizijec, ki vzpostavi stike z agenti, institucijo ali organizacijo tuje države, da bi ogrozil „temeljne interese Tunizije“ in njeno „gospodarsko varnost“.
The new legislation stipulates that any Tunisian who establishes contacts with agents of a foreign country, institution or organisation to harm ‘Tunisia’s vital interests’ and its ‘economic security’ will be subject to punishment.
Kazenski zakonik je bil spremenjen, da bi kriminaliziral aktiviste na področju človekovih pravic zaradi njihove zagovorniške dejavnosti in da bi se zlasti osredotočil na zagovornike človekovih pravic, ki so se pred kratkim srečali z evropskimi uradniki in poslanci zaradi zaskrbljujočih podatkov o razmerah v Tuniziji v času, ko se je EU pogajala o krepitvi odnosov s to državo.
The changes to the Penal Code are intended to criminalise human rights activists for their advocacy work and target particularly vocal human rights defenders who recently met European officials and parliamentarians with regard to Tunisia’s alarming human rights record at the same time as the EU is negotiating an enhancement of its relations with Tunisia.