natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Stroški doseganja skladnosti s predpisi bi za sektor postali visoki, npr. za novo infrastrukturo za rezervoarje za gorivo, hkrati pa bi se povečalo tveganje za "turizem zaradi cenejšega goriva" in goljufije.
The sector would also face high costs of compliance, for example for new infrastructure for tank facilities, while there would be an increased risk of tank tourism and fraud.
Komisija je pri nedavni reviziji odstopanj kljub temu presodila, da ti pomisleki niso upravičeni.
The Commission, in a recent review of the derogations, nevertheless ruled these concerns as ‘not justified’.
Se Svet zaveda morebitnih pogubnih posledic ukinitve odstopanj za različne sektorje, vključno z vodnimi športi, turizmom in jahtno industrijo?
Is the Council aware of the potentially devastating impact of abolishing the derogation on various sectors, including water sports, tourism and the marine industry?
Se Svet strinja, da bi bila ukinitev odstopanj dejansko v neposrednem nasprotju s prvotnim namenom direktive, to je uskladitev davčnih stopenj na energente, da bi čim manj izkrivljale razmere na notranjem trgu?
Does the Council share the assessment that the results of ending the exemption would in fact run directly counter to the Directive's primary aim, namely the harmonisation of tax levels on energy products so as to reduce distortions in the Internal Market?
Bo Svet torej podprl podaljšanje veljavnosti teh odstopanj po 31. decembru 2006, če vlade zadevnih držav zaprosijo zanj?
Will the Council therefore support a renewal of the derogation after 31 December 2006 if the governments concerned apply for a renewal?
UL L 283, 31.10.2003, str.
OJ L 283, 31.10.2003, p.
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0122/06
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0122/06
Zadeva: Mlečne kvote
Subject: Milk quotas
Evropska komisija namerava v letu 2008 prevzeti "zdravstveni pregled" skupne kmetijske politike, ki bo verjetno vključeval razpravo o prihodnosti mlečnih kvot.
The European Commission intends to undertake a ‘health check’ of the CAP in 2008, which is likely to include a debate on the future of milk quotas.
Obstoječa ureditev zanje, ki velja od leta 1984 in je predvidena do leta 2015, je bila na nekaterih področjih vprašljiva in so o njej razpravljali ministri za kmetijstvo na neformalnem srečanju v Ouluju.
The existing regime of milk quotas, which has been in force since 1984 and is set to continue until 2015, has been questioned from certain quarters and was discussed at the informal meeting of the agriculture ministers in Oulu.
Zaradi znakov možnega postopnega odpravljanja sistema kvot (opuščanja) je sedaj potrebna primerna razprava, da bodo proizvajalci in industrija imeli čas za prilagajanje možnim prihodnjim spremembam.
In view of these signs of a possible progressive dismantling of the quota system (phasing-out), it seems necessary now to have a proper debate so that producers and the industry have time to adapt to possible future changes.
Ali namerava Evropska komisija obdržati do leta 2015 sistem mlečnih kvot, ki zagotavlja določeno varstvo številnim proizvajalcem, ali pa namerava sistem kvot postopno odpraviti ali ga postopoma odpravljati od leta 2008 naprej?
Does the European Commission intend to maintain the system of milk quotas until 2015, which offers a certain protection for many producers, or does it intend to dismantle the quota system progressively or gradually from 2008 onwards?
Če se bo odločila za opuščanje, katere posebne ukrepe bo zahtevala za proizvajalce mleka?
If phasing out is intended, what specific measures might be involved for milk producers?
USTNO VPRAŠANJE Z RAZPRAVO O-0123/06
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0123/06
Zadeva: Podpora javno-zasebnih partnerstev in kohezijske politike
Subject: Support for PPPs and cohesion policy
Javno-zasebna partnerstva (PPP), ki na novo opredeljujejo odnos med javno upravo in zasebnim sektorjem, se pospešeno razvijajo ter imajo ključno vlogo pri projektih kohezijske politike in doseganju lizbonskih ciljev.
The phenomenon of public-private partnerships (PPP), which is redefining the relationship between public administration and the private sector, is developing apace and is playing a key role in cohesion policy projects as well as in terms of attaining the Lisbon objectives.
To potrjuje tudi Zelena knjiga o javno-zasebnih partnerstvih in sporočilo Komisije o javno-zasebnih partnerstvih ter zakonodaja Skupnosti o javnih naročilih in koncesijah.
This has been confirmed by both the PPP Green Paper and the Commission Communication on Public-Private Partnerships and Community Law on Public Procurement and Concessions.
Mešani model, po katerem ima javni organ v lasti infrastrukturo, medtem ko zasebno, pogosto nadnacionalno, podjetje izvaja storitve na podlagi izvajalske pogodbe, je lahko dobra in učinkovita praksa pri upravljanju javnih storitev.
The mixed model, whereby a public administration institution owns the infrastructure and a private, often supranational, company carries out services on the basis of an operating contract, can be considered good and effective practice in the management of public sector services.
Nove države članice morajo obveznosti, ki izhajajo iz zakonodaje Skupnosti, izpolniti v razmeroma kratkem času.
New Member States have to fulfil the requirements arising from Community law in a relatively short period.
Ena od teh obveznosti je področje upravljanja voda, pri čemer je treba modernizirati in razviti infrastrukturo, da bodo izpolnjeni pogoji iz Direktive Sveta 91/271/EGS o čiščenju komunalne odpadne vode.
One example is in the area of water management, where infrastructure needs to be modernised and developed to meet the conditions of Council Directive 91/271/EEC concerning urban waste water treatment.
S sprejetjem obveznosti so države članice in zlasti upravni organi, ki imajo v lasti infrastrukturo za upravljanje voda, menile, da bodo finančna sredstva iz kohezijskega sklada pripomogla k izpolnjevanju obveznosti, ki izhajajo iz pravnega reda Skupnosti.
In making a commitment, the Member States and in particular the administrative authorities that own water management infrastructure proceeded on the basis that the financial resources from the cohesion fund would contribute towards fulfilling the requirements arising from the acquis.
Vendar, ko je treba odobriti projekte v okviru kohezijskega sklada z mešanim modelom (infrastruktura je v lasti lokalnega organa, vendar projekt izvaja zasebno podjetje), se upravni organi, kot sami opozarjajo, soočajo s precejšnjo Komisijino težavo.
However, when it comes to approving projects under the cohesion fund involving the mixed model (infrastructure owned by the local authority and operated by a private entity), administrative authorities indicate that they are being faced with a considerable problem on the Commission side.
Komisija meni, da lahko v takih primerih pride do kršitve nekaterih splošnih predpisov EU, ki niso točno določeni ali ne obstajajo v nobenem zakonodajnem aktu, zato zahteva upoštevanje abstraktnih „najboljših mednarodnih praks“.
The Commission believes that, in these cases, there can be a violation of some general EU rules, which are not precisely specified or to be found in any legislative act, and demands that some abstract ‘best international practice’ be followed.
Komisija meni, da se s težavami, povezanimi z uporabo javno-zasebnih partnerstev pri upravljanju voda, soočajo v različnih državah članicah, kjer se jih obravnava od primera do primera.
According to the Commission, there are problems relating to the use of PPPs in water management in various Member States, which are being dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
Vendar Komisija razen splošnih ugotovitev še vedno ni predložila ustreznih pravno podprtih argumentov v dokazilo, da je bila v teh primerih kršena zakonodaja Skupnosti in da iz tega razloga ni mogoče zagotoviti pomoči iz kohezijskega sklada.
However, beyond making general observations, the Commission has yet to put forward any relevant legal argument demonstrating that Community law is being broken in these cases and that aid therefore cannot be provided from the cohesion fund.
Komisija s takim delovanjem brez kakršne koli ustrezne pravne podlage, onemogoča ustrezno uporabo kohezijskega sklada za izpolnjevanje obveznosti držav članic, ki izhajajo iz zakonodaje Skupnosti.
By its actions, which are not based on any proper legal argumentation, the Commission is preventing the proper use of the cohesion fund for the purposes of fulfilling the commitments placed on the Member States by Community law.
Zaradi takega stališča Komisije so ogroženi številni projekti, ki uporabljajo model javno-zasebnega partnerstva in zelo pomembno vplivajo na življenjsko kakovost državljanov.
As a result of the Commission’s position, a number of projects using the PPP model that are having a fundamental impact on citizens’ quality of life are under threat.
Če bi bila pri uporabi javno-zasebnih partnerstev kršena zakonodaja Skupnosti, bi Komisija kot varuh pogodb zagotovo nemudoma sprožila postopek za ugotavljanje kršitev.
If it was in a position in which Community law was being violated in the use of PPPs, the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, would surely initiate infringement proceedings without delay.
Kako namerava Komisija rešiti ta položaj, da bodo lahko države članice črpale sredstva iz kohezijskega sklada in s tem hkrati izpolnjevale zahteve iz Direktive 91/271/EGS, h katerim so se zavezale s pristopnim aktom?
How does the Commission intend to resolve this situation so that Member States can absorb financing from the cohesion fund and at the same time fulfil the requirements laid down in Directive 91/271/EEC to which they are committed under the Accession Treaty?
Kako namerava Komisija zagotoviti pravno varnost za upravne organe in njihove partnerje ter načelo enakega obravnavanja?
How does the Commission intend to ensure legal certainty for administrative authorities and their partners and to guarantee the principle of equal treatment?
UL L 135, 30.5.1991, str.
OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, p.
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0124/06
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0124/06
Zadeva: Pravice pacientov v Evropski uniji
Subject: Patients' rights in the European Union
Zaradi izključitve zdravstvenih storitev iz direktive o storitvah ter nedavnih sklepov Sodišča evropskih skupnosti o dostopu do zdravljenja v tujini so potrebni nujni sklepi.
The exclusion of health services from the scope of the services directive and the recent decisions of the ECJ on access to medical treatment abroad require urgent decisions.
Potreben je širši pristop in večji poudarek na pravicah pacientov ter na tem, kako jih uresničevati na enoten način v vsej EU, ne glede na lastništvo zdravstvenih zmogljivosti, na sistem nacionalnega socialnega zavarovanja, organizacijo in upravljanje nacionalnih zdravstvenih sistemov in na to, ali se zdravljenje zagotavlja v matični državi ali drugi državi članici.
There is a need for a much broader approach and greater emphasis on patients' rights and how to implement them in a uniform manner across the EU, regardless of the ownership of medical facilities, national social security schemes, organisation and management of national health systems, or whether medical treatment is provided in the home country or in another Member State.
Temeljna pravica dostopa do zdravstvenih storitev za etnične manjšine (na primer romsko prebivalstvo), begunce, migrante in brezdomce je naslednje vprašanje, ki potrebuje veliko pozornost.
The fundamental right of access to healthcare services for ethnic minorities (for example the Roma population), refugees, migrants and the homeless is another element which needs careful consideration.
V Evropski uniji se vedno večje število pacientov odloča o tem, kje in kako se bodo zdravili.
Within the European Union, growing numbers of patients are exercising choices about where and how they are treated.
Poleg tega ni čezmejne pravice pacientov do zahtevka za nadomestilo, obveznosti skrbnega ravnanja, vzpostavljanja in uresničevanja poklicne etike in načel.
Furthermore, there is no cross -border dimension to patients' entitlement to compensation claims, duty of care and establishment and implementation of professional ethics and principles.
Pacienti imajo za izbiro malo informacij in v EU ni skupnega standardnega pristopa do vprašanja pravic pacientov.
There is little information for patients making choices, and there is no common EU standard approach to the issue of patients' rights.
Evropski parlament kot demokratično izvoljeni predstavniki državljanov zastavlja Komisiji vprašanja:
As the democratically elected representatives of citizens, the European Parliament puts the following questions to the Commission.
Ali je Evropska komisija seznanjena z nacionalnimi zakonodajami o pravicah pacientov in na kakšen način se lahko te vpeljane pravice uresničujejo v drugi državi članici, vključno s pravico do čezmejne pritožbe in nadomestila?
Is the Commission familiar with national legislations on patients' rights and how these established rights could be exercised in another Member State, including the right to cross-border complaints and compensation?
Ali Evropska komisija namerava ločevati pravico do zdravja, pravico biti pacient in pravico pacienta ali potrošnika zdravstvenih storitev in te pravice obravnavati?
Does the Commission intend to identify and address the right to health, the right to be a patient and rights as a patient or consumer of health services?
Ali Komisija priznava, da nedavni sklepi Sodišča evropskih skupnosti o povračilu stroškov za zdravstveno varstvo v drugih državah podpirajo temeljne svoboščine enotnega trga?
Does the Commission acknowledge that the recent decisions of the ECJ on reimbursement of costs for healthcare in other countries underpin the fundamental freedoms of the single market?
Ali Komisija upošteva učinke globalizacije in informacijskih tokov in ali namerava opredeliti partnerstvo, da bo to za paciente jasno in razumljivo?
Has the Commission taken account of globalisation effects and information flows, and does it intend to identify partnerships to make them clear and understandable for patients?
Ali Komisija priznava potrebo po vzpostavitvi enotnega svežnja (listine) osnovnih pravic pacientov v Evropski uniji ter pripravi okvira in mehanizmov kot načina, ki naj zagotavlja njihovo spremljanje in uresničevanje v praksi?
Does the Commission recognise the need to establish a uniform package (Charter) of essential patients' rights in the European Union, and to elaborate their framework and mechanisms as a way to ensure their observance and exercise in practice?
Ali Komisija upošteva, da se konvencije Sveta Evrope nanašajo na pravice pacientov?
Has the Commission taken into consideration the Council of Europe Conventions concerning patients' rights issues?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0125/06
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0125/06
Zadeva: Nadaljnje približevanje nadzornih praks na ravni EU
Subject: Further convergence in supervisory practices at EU level
Med potekom Ekonomsko-finančnega sveta, ki je septembra potekal v Helsinkih, je Ekonomsko-finančni odbor na podlagi Memoranduma o soglasju, sprejetem maja 2005, poročal o rezultatih simulacije kriznega upravljanja, ki je potekala aprila.
During the ECOFIN Council held in Helsinki in September, the Economic and Financial Committee (EFC) reported back on the results of the simulated crisis management exercise which took place in April, on the basis of a memorandum of understanding adopted in May 2005.
Rezultat vaje je jasno pokazal, da je med vpletenimi zadevnimi nadzornimi institucijami potrebno izboljšati usklajevanje, da bi lahko zagotovili ustrezno upravljanje in tako finančno stabilnost.
The outcome of this exercise clearly indicated that better coordination is needed between the relevant supervisory institutions involved in order to guarantee proper management and hence financial stability.
Podobna simulacija je že načrtovana za leto 2009, v vmesnem obdobju pa mora Ekonomsko-finančni odbor do jeseni 2007 pripraviti osnutek poročila o vprašanju delitve pristojnosti med zadevnimi oblastmi in državami.
Another exercise of the same kind is already scheduled for 2009 but in the meantime, the EFC is required to draft a report by autumn 2007 about question of sharing responsibilities between the authorities and the countries concerned.
Evropski parlament pozdravlja to pobudo in sprejema splošni pristop.
The European Parliament welcomes these initiatives and approves the overall approach.
Zaradi trenutnih dinamičnih sprememb na trgu in zlasti zaradi povečanja alternativnih investicijskih instrumentov interesne skupine vse glasneje zahtevajo odločnejše ukrepe.
In the context of the current dynamic changes in the market and in particular the increase of alternative investment vehicles, the stakeholders are loudly calling for stronger measures.
Evropski parlament je prav tako zelo zaskrbljen zaradi tega perečega vprašanja in je vedno pozival k večjemu približevanju nacionalnih nadzornih praks, na primer v poročilu Muškat iz julija 2006, v katerem je predlagal ustanovitev odbora modrecev, ki bi razmislili o povezavah med konsolidiranjem trgov in finančnih institucij, nadzorom, finančno stabilnostjo in kriznim upravljanjem.
The European Parliament is also very concerned about this urgent question and has always been calling for an increased convergence of national supervisory practices, for example in the Muscat report adopted in July 2006 where it proposed to set up a committee of wise persons, to start a reflection on the implications of the consolidation of markets and financial institutions, prudential supervision, financial stability and crisis management.
Kateri ukrepi bi morali biti po mnenju predsedstva sprejeti v prihodnosti in na kakšen način naj bi pri tem sodelovala Evropski parlament in Komisija?
What does the Presidency see as appropriate steps to be undertaken and how would the EP and the Commission be involved?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0126/06
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0126/06
Rezultat vaje je jasno pokazal, da je med vpletenimi zadevnimi nadzornimi institucijami potrebno izboljšati usklajevanje, da bi lahko zagotovili ustrezno upravljanje in tako finančno stabilnost.
The outcome of this exercise has clearly indicated that better coordination is needed between the relevant supervisory institutions involved in order to guarantee proper management and hence financial stability.
Podobna simulacija je že načrtovana za leto 2009, v vmesnem obdobju pa mora Ekonomsko-finančni odbor do jeseni 2007 pripraviti osnutek poročila o vprašanju delitve pristojnosti med zadevnimi oblastmi in državami.
Another exercise of the same kind is already scheduled for 2009 but in the meantime, the EFC is required to draft a report by autumn 2007 about the question of sharing responsibilities between the authorities and the countries concerned.
Kaj namerava Komisija storiti na tem področju, da bi upoštevala potrebe, ugotovljene pri simulaciji kriznega upravljanja, in oblikovala prihodnji evropski finančni nadzor?
What is the Commission intending to undertake in this area in order to respond to the needs identified in the crisis-management exercise and to shape the future of European financial supervision?
Ali je Komisija pripravljena odgovoriti na pozive interesnih skupin ter povabiti Evropski parlament in Svet k skupni obravnavi nadaljnjih ukrepov?
Is the Commission ready to respond to the appeals of the stakeholders and invite the EP and Council to discuss together further steps?
USTNO VPRAŠANJE Z RAZPRAVO O-0127/06
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0127/06
Zadeva: Zahteva ZDA po obveznem vizumu za državljane EU iz 10 držav članic
Subject: US visa requirement for EU citizens from 10 Member States
Trenutno ZDA še zahtevajo vstopne vizume za državljane iz devetih od desetih novih članic (Ciper, Češka republika, Estonija, Madžarska, Latvija, Litva, Malta, Poljska, Slovaška) ter Grčije.
To date the USA continues to require entry visas for citizens coming from nine of the 10 new Member States (Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia) as well as Greece.
Gre za stanje nevzajemnosti, saj te države omogočajo državljanom ZDA potovanje brez vizuma, ZDA pa ne vračajo z enakim.
This situation is one of non-reciprocity, whereby these countries grant US citizens visa-free travel but this is not reciprocated.
Še več, ta položaj je diskriminatoren, saj je vizumska obveznost naložena desetim od petindvajsetih držav, kar povzroča neupravičeno razlikovanje med državljani EU, ki prihajajo iz različnih držav EU.
More significantly, this situation is discriminatory in that the visa requirement is imposed on 10 out of 25 EU countries, thereby creating an unjustified distinction between EU citizens coming from different EU countries.
Državljani prizadetih držav EU upravičeno pričakujejo, da bodo obravnavani enako kot državljani ostalih petnajstih držav.
Citizens from the affected EU countries rightly expect to be treated equally as citizens from the other 15 countries.
Kljub prizadevanjem Komisije zadnje poročilo o ohranitvi stanj nevzajemnosti v nekaterih državah na področju izvzetja iz vizumske obveznosti - KOM(2006)0568 končno -, ne navaja napredka.
Despite the Commission's efforts, the last report on cases where visa waiver non-reciprocity is maintained by certain countries - COM(2006)0568 final - reports no progress.
Ob upoštevanju navedenega:
In the light of the above:
kakšne ukrepe je pripravljena sprejeti Komisija, da popravi nastali položaj?
What action is the Commission prepared to take in order to redress this situation?
kdaj bo po pričakovanjih Komisije odpravljena zahteva po vstopnem vizumu za ZDA za prizadetih deset držav?
When does the Commission expect the requirement for US entry visas on the affected 10 countries to be lifted?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0128/06
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0128/06
Zadeva: Ponovna pogajanja o sporazumu o vladnih naročilih (GPA)
Subject: Renegotiation of the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA)
Večstranski sporazum o vladnih naročilih (GPA), o katerem so potekala pogajanja v okviru STO, je začel veljati 1. januarja 1996.
The plurilateral Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) negotiated in the framework of the WTO took effect on 1 January 1996.
Čeprav je sporazum omejen, tako v svojem obsegu kot v številu sodelujočih (36), ima ključno vlogo pri odpiranju, kolikor je le mogoče, trga za javna naročila (blago, storitve in gradbene pogodbe) tujim konkurentom ter pri zagotavljanju transparentnih, pravičnih in nediskriminacijskih pogojev za zasebne ponudnike.
Although limited both in its scope and number of participants (36), this Agreement plays an essential role in opening as much as possible of public procurement business (goods, services and construction contracts) to foreign competition and ensuring transparent, fair and non-discriminatory conditions for private bidders.
Sporazum o vladnih naročilih je bil predmet pogajanj v preteklih letih, da bi se izboljšalo njegove določbe in da bi se ga čim bolj razširilo za vse strani na podlagi medsebojne vzajemnosti.
The GPA has been subject to renegotiation for a number of years with a view to improving its provisions and achieving the greatest possible extension of its coverage among all parties on the basis of mutual reciprocity.
V pričakovanju sklepov v začetku leta 2007 se v tem okviru trenutno preučujejo predlogi sprememb k sporazumu in v Ženevi poteka "proces zahtev in ponudb".
In this context, amendments to the agreement are currently being considered and a request-offer process is taking place in Geneva with a view to reaching a conclusion towards the beginning of 2007.
Ali lahko Komisija razloži, katere so bile glavne prednostne naloge EU pri tem ponovnem pogajanju, in ali meni, da bodo ti cilji doseženi?
Could the Commission explain what have been the main priorities of the EU in this renegotiation and whether it is confident that these objectives will be achieved?