natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ali bi nas Komisija lahko obvestila o namenu tega novega sestanka voditeljev, razen podpisa sporazuma na področju civilnega letalstva?
Could the Commission provide information about the objectives of this new summit, other than the signing of a civil aviation agreement?
Ali se bodo pogajanja v zvezi z razvojno agendo iz Dohe zaključila v letu 2010, v skladu z izjavo skupine G20 ob zaključku srečanja voditeljev držav v Pittsburghu?
Will the talks on the Doha Development Round be concluded in 2010, in accordance with the declaration adopted by the G20 at the end of the Pittsburgh summit?
Kako namerava Komisija preseči razhajanja znotraj EU, zlasti na kmetijskem področju, da bi pospešil obnovitev pogajanj z državami Mercosur zaradi sklenitve sporazuma o prosti trgovini?
With a view to moving forward the negotiations with Mercosur designed to lead to the conclusion of a free trade agreement, how does the Commission intend to overcome the divergences within the EU, particularly in the area of agriculture?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0092/2010
Question for oral answer O-0092/2010
Zadeva: Stanje reke Jordan s posebnim poudarkom na območju njenega spodnjega toka
Subject: The situation of the Jordan River with special regard to the Lower Jordan River area
Ne glede na to je reka Jordan opustošena zaradi prekomernega izkoriščanja, onesnaževanja in nezadostnega regionalnega upravljanja.
Nevertheless, the Jordan River has been devastated by overexploitation, pollution and lack of regional management.
Izrael, Jordanija in Sirija so preusmerile okoli 98 % sladkovodnih virov te reke, posledica pa je 50-odstotna izguba biotske raznovrstnosti.
An estimated 98 % of the river’s fresh water resources have been diverted by Israel, Jordan and Syria with a resulting 50 % loss of biodiversity.
Trenutno se v spodnji tok reke Jordan iztekajo samo kmetijski iztoki, preusmerjeni tokovi slane vode in neprečiščene odplake.
All that is presently left flowing in the Lower Jordan River is agricultural run-off, diverted saline waters and untreated sewage.
Gradnja novih čistilnih naprav za odstranjevanje najnevarnejših onesnaževal je pomemben dosežek, vendar se bo stanje samo še poslabšalo, če ta uspeh ne bo povezan z dotokom sladkovodnih virov.
While the building of new wastewater treatment centres aimed at removing serious pollutants is a major achievement, if this advancement is not coupled with the allocation of fresh water resources, the situation will only deteriorate.
Brez konkretnih ukrepov se bodo dolgi odseki spodnje struge do konca leta 2011 izsušili.
Therefore, without concrete action, long stretches of the Lower Jordan River will run dry by the end of 2011.
Sanacija reke Jordan, zlasti območja njenega spodnjega toka, je bistvenega pomena za izraelske, jordanske in palestinske lokalne skupnosti, ki se soočajo z enakimi izzivi glede oskrbe z vodo, poleg tega pa prinaša izjemne koristi za gospodarstvo in ustvarjanje zaupanja.
The rehabilitation of the Jordan River, and the Lower Jordan River area in particular, is of the greatest importance for Israeli, Jordanian and Palestinian local communities sharing the same water challenges, and offers tremendous economic and trust-building benefits.
Dejavno sodelovanje med temi vladami in lokalnimi skupnostmi bi lahko bil pomemben prispevek k prizadevanjem za mir v regiji.
An active cooperation between governments and the local communities concerned may be a major contribution to regional peace efforts.
Več mednarodnih akterjev, tudi Evro-sredozemska parlamentarna skupščina, že obravnavajo vprašanje stanja reke Jordan.
Several international actors, including the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly, have addressed the situation of the Jordan River.
Tudi podpora Evropske unije bi lahko bila odločilna.
The EU’s support may also be decisive.
Ali je Komisija, glede na to, da Evropska unija prispeva znatna finančna sredstva za razvojne projekte na Bližnjem vzhodu in je zavezana bližnjevzhodnemu mirovnemu procesu, sanacijo reke Jordan, zlasti območja njenega spodnjega toka, opredelila kot prednostno nalogo miru in razvoja v regiji?
Taking into account that the EU provides extensive funding to development projects in the Middle East, and is committed to the Middle East peace process, has the Commission identified the rehabilitation of the Jordan River, and the Lower Jordan River area in particular, as a peace and development priority in the region?
Kako lahko Evropska unija in države članice v večji meri, tudi v okviru partnerstva med EU in Sredozemljem, spodbujajo in podpirajo celovit načrt upravljanja za odpravo posledic opustošenja reke Jordan ter okrepijo razsežnost ustvarjanja zaupanja teh prizadevanj?
How can the EU and its Member States further encourage and support, also in the framework of the EU-Mediterranean partnership, the development and implementation of a comprehensive management plan to rectify the devastation wrought on the Jordan River as well as strengthening the trust-building dimensions of these efforts?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0093/2010
Question for oral answer O-0093/2010
v imenu skupine S&D Zadeva: Začetek veljavnosti konvencije o kasetnem strelivu 1. avgusta 2010 in vloga EU
on behalf of the S&D Group Subject: Entry into force on 1 August 2010 of the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) and the role of the EU
Parlament je svojih resolucijah P6_TA(2008)0565 in P7_TA(2010)0061 pozval države članice EU, naj podpišejo in ratificirajo konvencijo o kasetnem strelivu, Svet in Komisijo pa prosil, naj državam članicam in tretjim državam pri tem pomagajo.
In resolutions P6_TA(2008)0565 and P7_TA(2010)0061 , Parliament urged EU Member States to sign and ratify the CCM and asked the Council and Commission to assist Member States and third countries in this respect.
V resoluciji iz leta 2008 je Parlament prav tako zaprosil Svet in Komisijo, naj pomagata državam, regijam in prebivalstvu, ki so utrpeli posledice uporabe kasetnega streliva.
The 2008 resolution also asked the Council and Commission to assist countries, regions and populations which have been affected by cluster munitions.
Poleg tega je države članice EU v resoluciji pozval, naj ne sprejmejo nobenih ukrepov, ki bi lahko obšli ali ogrozili konvencijo o kasetnem strelivu in njene določbe, na primer s sprejetjem ali ratifikacijo konvencije o konvencionalnem orožju, ki uporabo kasetnega streliva dopušča.
In addition, that resolution urged EU Member States not to take any action which might circumvent or jeopardise the CCM and its provisions by adopting or ratifying the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW), which allows the use of cluster munitions.
V resoluciji iz leta 2008 je Parlament ob koncu pozval države članice, naj ne uporabljajo, skladiščijo, proizvajajo ali izvažajo kasetnega streliva, trgujejo z njim ali vlagajo vanj, dokler konvencija ne stopi v veljavo.
Finally, the 2008 resolution also called on Member States not to use, invest in, stockpile, produce, transfer or export cluster munitions until the CCM has entered into force.
Kakšne ukrepe je sprejel Svet v odgovor na zahteve Evropskega parlamenta iz leta 2008 in 2010?
What is the Council doing in response to the demands made by the European Parliament in 2008 and 2010?
Na kakšen način poskuša omogočiti in prispevati k temu, da bi države članice EU pravočasno podpisale in ratificirale konvencijo, da bi lahko začela veljati 1. avgusta 2010?
What is it doing in order to facilitate and support the timely signature and ratification of the CCM by EU Member States, with a view to its entry into force on 1 August 2010?
Katere ukrepe je sprejel za pomoč regijam, ki jih je prizadela uporaba kasetnega streliva?
What is it doing in order to assist regions which are affected by the use of cluster munitions?
Kakšno je njegovo stališče v zvezi s konvencijo o kasetnem strelivu?
What is its position with regard to the Convention on Conventional Weapons?
Kakšno stališče bo sprejel v zvezi s prihodnjim srečanjem, ki bo potekalo od 30. avgusta do 3. septembra 2010 v Ženevi?
Which position will the Council take with a view to the next meeting on 30 August – 3 September 2010 in Geneva?
Ali podpira zamisel o uvedbi moratorija na izvoz kasetnega streliva in o uničenju njegovih zalog?
Is the Council supporting the idea of an export moratorium and the destruction of stockpiles of cluster munitions?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0094/2010
Question for oral answer O-0094/2010
v imenu skupine EFD Zadeva: Umor monsinjora Luigija Padoveseja v turškem mestu Iskendrun
on behalf of the EFD Group Subject: Murder of Monsignor Luigi Padovese in Iskenderun
V četrtek, 3. junija 2010, je bil brutalno umorjen monsinjor Luigi Padovese, rimsko-katoliški škof v Anatoliji, apostolski vikar Svetega sedeža v Turčiji in predsednik turške škofovske konference, ubil pa ga je 26-letni Turek, Murat Altun, ki je bil štiri leta njegov šofer.
On Thursday June 3 Monsignor Luigi Padovese, a Roman Catholic bishop in Anatolia, the Apostolic Vicar of the Holy See in Turkey and the President of the Turkish Bishops' Conference, was brutally murdered by Murat Altun, a 26 year-old Turkish man who had been his driver for four years.
Turške oblasti so nemudoma zanikale vsako povezavo med tem dejanjem in verskimi razlogi, pri čemer so tragični dogodek pripisali domnevnim duševnim motnjam mladeniča.
Straightaway, the Turkish authorities denied any connection between this act and religious reasons, blaming the tragic event on the young man's presumed mental illness.
Vendar nove informacije kažejo na to, da je vendarle treba več pozornosti nameniti prvotni različici: očividci zagotavljajo podrobnosti, ki podpirajo teorijo umora, ki temelji na verski in politični osnovi.
But some new information seems to suggest that consideration may after all have to be given to the original version: eyewitnesses provide details endorsing the theory of a religiously and politically-based murder.
Mladenič naj bi namreč po tem, ko je že skoraj obglavil škofa dejal: „Ubil sem velikega Satana, Alah je velik“.
Indeed, after having almost beheaded the churchman, the young man is said to have shouted “I murdered the big Satan, Allah is great”.
Nadalje je priznal, da je zagrešil zločin, po tem ko je doživel „božansko razodetje“.
Furthermore, he confessed that he had committed the crime after having received a “divine revelation”.
To bi potrdilo hipotezo, da se je zgodil pravi „obredni umor“, ki ga ne gre pripisati duševnim motnjam, katerih mladenič ne more dokazati z nobenimi zdravniškimi ali dokumentiranimi dokazili.
This account would confirm the hypothesis of a real “ritual murder”, rather than a mental disorder, which the young murderer cannot prove through any medical or documentary evidence.
Vendar je ta tragični dogodek le najnovejši v zaskrbljujočem nizu nasilnih dejanj na verski osnovi, ki so se v zadnjih letih zgodili v Turčiji.
However, this tragic event is only the latest in a worrying sequence of religious based violent acts which have occurred in Turkey in recent years.
Ali je Komisija v stiku s turškimi oblastmi, da bi izvedela kakšne so bile natančne okoliščine tega dejanja, ki je pretresel in zaostril svetovno mnenje glede na to, da je to najresnejše dejanje nasilja proti kristjanom in zaradi katerega je izgubil življenje vodilni rimsko-katoliške cerkve v Turčiji?
Is the Commission in contact with the Turkish authorities in order to know the exact circumstances of an act that has shocked and angered world opinion, being so far the most serious act of anti-Christian violence, struck the head of the Roman Catholic Church in Turkey?
Ali Komisija meni, da je odnos turških oblasti do številnih primerov resnega nasilja proti verskim in etničnim manjšinam v zadnjih letih v skladu s pravnim redom Evropske unije, ki je nujen pogoj za vstop v Evropsko unijo?
Does the Commission believe that the behaviour of the Turkish authorities with regard to the large number of instances of serious violence against religious and ethnic minorities in recent years is in line with the acquis communautaire that represents a necessary condition to join the European Union?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0095/2010
Question for oral answer O-0095/2010
v imenu Odbora za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve Zadeva: Evropski instrument za finančno stabilnost, evropski mehanizem za finančno stabilizacijo in prihodnji ukrepi
on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs Subject: European Financial Stability Facility and European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism and future actions
Evropski mehanizem za finančno stabilizacijo je bil ustanovljen 11. maja 2010 (Uredba Sveta (EU) št. 407/2010 ).
On 11 May 2010 the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism (EFSM) was established (Council Regulation (EU) No 407/2010 ).
7. junija 2010 so države članice iz euroobmočja ustanovile Evropski instrument za finančno stabilnost, ki so mu so zagotovile sredstva do 440 milijard EUR.
On 7 June 2010 the euro area Member States established the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF), with euro area Member States providing guarantees for EFSF issuance up to a total of EUR 440 billion.
18. februarja 2002 je bil vzpostavljen instrument za srednjeročno finančno pomoč za plačilne bilance držav članic (Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 332/2002 ).
On 18 February 2002 a facility providing medium-term financial assistance for the Member States’ balance of payments was established (Council Regulation (EC) No 332/2002 ).
Ali lahko Komisija pojasni, kaj bi v praksi pomenilo besedilo, ki se nanaša na evropski mehanizem za finančno stabilizacijo in ki se glasi „omejeni na kritje, razpoložljivo v okviru zgornje meje lastnih sredstev za odobritve plačil“ za letni proračun EU in večletni finančni okvir ter v zvezi s 60 milijardami EUR, omenjenih v sklepih sveta Ecofin?
As regards the EFSM, could the Commission clarify what the words ‘limited to the margin available under the own resources ceiling for payment appropriations’ would mean in practice for the annual EU budget and for the multiannual financial framework and the relationship to the EUR 60 billion as mentioned in the Ecofin conclusions?
Ali je Komisija pripravljena opraviti oceno učinka teh dveh instrumentov ob upoštevanju, da sta morala biti oba, to je evropski instrument za finančno stabilnost in evropski mehanizem za finančno stabilizacijo, ustvarjena hitro in na ad hoc temeljih?
Taking into account that both instruments, i.e. EFSM and EFSF, had to be established quickly and on an ad hoc basis, is the Commission prepared to carry out an impact assessment of these two instruments?
Katera varovala preprečujejo morebitne posredne učinke teh instrumentov na sposojanje od Evropske investicijske banke in financiranje z njene strani?
What safeguards prevent possible ‘knock-on effects’ of these instruments on the borrowing and financing by the EIB?
Ali ob pogledu nazaj lahko sklepamo, da bi bilo bolje, da bi ta instrumenta obstajala že pred krizo, in česa bi se EU lahko naučila iz nedavne izkušnje, tudi o svojem postopku odločanja?
In hindsight would it have been better if these two instruments had been in existence prior to the crisis, and what lessons, including on the EU decision-making procedure, should the EU draw from this recent experience?
Za kdaj Komisija predvideva zakonodajni predlog o instrumentu za trajno upravljanje dolžniške krize in kakšna bo zakonodajna podlaga zanj?
When does the Commission foresee the expected legislative proposal for a permanent sovereign debt crisis management mechanism and what would be the legal basis?
Kako namerava Komisija zagotoviti vključitev Evropskega parlamenta v te nove postopke?
How does the Commission intend to ensure the involvement of the European Parliament in relation to all these new procedures?
Kako bo delovalo usklajevanje med evropskim mehanizmom za finančno stabilizacijo in Mednarodnim denarnim skladom pri določanju obrestnih mer in dodelitvi sredstev ter kakšne bodo posledice njune morebitne neusklajenosti?
How will the coordination between the EFSF and IMF operate in terms of interest rates and allocation of funds and what is the effect if they do not rank pari passu?
Kako bodo zadovoljene potrebe držav, ki niso članice euroobmočja, če se evropski mehanizem za finančno stabilizacijo izčrpa?
In the event of the EFSM being used up, how would a need by a non-euro-area Member State be addressed?
Zakaj je bil člen 122(2) Pogodbe uporabljen kot pravna podlaga za Uredbo (EU) št. 407/2010 in člen 352 (nekdanji člen 308) kot pravna podlaga za Uredbo (ES) št. 332/2002?
Why was Article 122(2) of the Treaty used as the legal base for Regulation (EU) No 407/2010 and Article 352 (ex Article 308) as the legal base for Regulation (EC) No 332/2002?
UL L 118, 12.5.2010, str.
OJ L 118, 12.5.2010, p.
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0096/2010
Question for oral answer O-0096/2010
v imenu skupine S&D Zadeva: Prost pretok delavcev - začasne omejitve za romunske in bolgarske državljane na trgu dela Evropske unije
on behalf of the S&D Group Subject: Free movement of workers - temporary restrictions affecting the Romanian and Bulgarian citizens on the European Union labour market
Komisija je v skladu s pristopno pogodbo dvakrat preučila, kako je delovala začasna omejitev pravic prostega pretoka delavcev iz osmih držav članic (EU8) in kakšen učinek je imela mobilnost delavcev iz novih držav članic (EU2) na trg dela v drugih državah članicah ter v obeh primerih prišla do zaključka, da je prost pretok delavcev ugoden za gospodarstvo in nima resnih negativnih posledic za trg dela.
In accordance with the Accession Treaty, the Commission has examined on two occasions how the transitional arrangements that temporarily restrict the right of free movement of workers from eight Member States (EU-8) have functioned and what impact mobility of workers from the new Member States (EU-2) has had on the labour markets of the other Member States and the conclusion was that both reports found the free movements of workers is beneficial to the economy and does not have serious negative side effects on the labour markets.
Kako namerava Komisija ukrepati, da bi spodbudila države članice, naj še naprej odpirajo svoj trg dela za delavce iz Romunije in Bolgarije?
What measures does the Commission take into consideration in order to encourage the Member States to further open their labour market to the labour force originating from Romania and Bulgaria?
Ali Komisija namerava preučiti in nadalje razviti študijo o delovnih in življenjskih razmerah nezakonite delovne sile iz Romunije in Bolgarije v drugih državah članicah EU?
Does the Commission intend to analyse and further develop a study regarding the working and living conditions of the ‘irregular’ labour force originating from Romania and Bulgaria in the other EU Member States?
Ali namerava Komisija poglobiti študijo o vplivu te nezakonite delovne sile na trg dela v teh državah članicah?
Does the Commission intend to elaborate a study concerning the influence of this ‘irregular’ labour force upon the labour market in these Member States?
Ali je možno, da bi omenjeni ukrepi povzročili prej negativne posledice za te trge dela kot pa zaščitili domačo delovno silo?
Could it be possible that the above-mentioned measures produce more negative effects on these labour markets rather than protect the internal labour force?
Ali Komisija meni, da bi podaljšanje sedanjih omejitev lahko ogrožalo romunske in bolgarske delavce ter jih postavilo v vlogo drugačnih oziroma drugorazrednih državljanov EU?
Does the Commission consider there is a possible risk that the prolongation of the present restrictions for the Romanian and Bulgarian workers will lead to the appearance of a de facto special/‘second class’ category of EU citizens?
Ali Komisija obravnava omenjene ukrepe kot skladne s cilji in duhom Lizbonske pogodbe in zlasti Listine EU o človekovih pravicah?
Does the Commission consider the above-mentioned measures as being consistent with the goals and the spirit of the Lisbon Treaty and in particular with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0097/2010
Question for oral answer O-0097/2010
v imenu skupine S&D Zadeva: Evropski sektor za krompirjev škrob po letu 2012
on behalf of the S&D Group Subject: EU potato starch sector after 2012
Po letu 2012 bodo sedanji sistem pomoči sektorju krompirjevega škroba nadomestila nevezana plačila.
From 2012 decoupled payments will replace the current aid system for the potato starch sector.
Presoje vplivov kažejo, da bi lahko sektor izgubil do 40 % sedanjega trga.
Impact assessments suggest that the sector may lose up to 40% of its current market.
Ali se Komisija strinja, da lahko industrija krompirjevega škroba z razvojem izdelkov na osnovi škroba pomembno prispeva k ekološkemu in zelenemu gospodarstvu?
Does the Commission agree that the potato starch industry can play an important role in a green, organics-based economy thanks to the development of starch-based products?
Kako namerava Komisija zagotoviti, da bo Evropska unija ohranila sektor krompirjevega škroba, ki bo sposoben izpolnjevati cilje EU 2020, zlasti glede spodbujanja bolj zelenega in konkurenčnega gospodarstva, ki gospodarneje izkorišča vire?
What measures does it intend to take to ensure that the EU retains a potato starch sector that is fit to play a role in delivering the EU 2020 objectives, notably the promotion of a ‘more resource efficient, greener and more competitive economy’?
Ali namerava Komisija v okviru sedanjih proračunskih omejitev uporabiti začasne ukrepe, da bi sektorju omogočila „nežen pristanek“ po letu 2012?
Is it considering putting in place interim measures – within current budgetary limits – to allow the sector a structured ‘soft landing’ after 2012?
Ali Komisija razmišlja o uvedbi prostovoljne sheme za prestrukturiranje sektorja, ki bi tistim, ki bi prostovoljno zmanjšali proizvodne zmogljivosti, omogočala dostop do pomoči za prestrukturiranje?
Has it considered introducing a voluntary restructuring scheme, under which operators that voluntarily reduce their production capacity become eligible for restructuring aid?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0098/2010
Question for oral answer O-0098/2010
v imenu skupine PPE Zadeva: Prihodnje financiranje programov čezmejnega sodelovanja iz evropskega instrumenta sosedstva in partnerstva
on behalf of the PPE Group Subject: Future allocation of the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) for the cross-border cooperation programmes (CBC) budget
Evropski parlament in Svet sta evropski instrument sosedstva in partnerstva potrdila 24. oktobra 2006.
The European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) was approved on 24 October 2006 by the European Parliament and the Council.
Do sedaj je bilo, s precejšnjo zamudo, sprejetih 13 projektov čezmejnega sodelovanja, za enajst med njimi je bil že objavljen razpis za zbiranje predlogov.
To date, 13 projected CBC programmes have been adopted and with a considerable delay, 11 of them have launched a call for proposals.
Člen 30 Uredbe (ES) št. 1638/2006 z dne 24. oktobra 2006 določa, naj bi Komisija do konca letošnjega leta zbrala ocene izvajanja tega instrumenta.
According to Article 30 of Regulation (EC) 1638/2006 of 24 October 2006, the Commission should have the results of the evaluation of ENPI implementation by the end of this year.
Glede na dosedanje rezultate izvajanja tega novega instrumenta sprašujemo naslednje: ali bi bila potrebna sprememba proračuna za obdobje 2007–2010 za sredstva, ki še niso bila porabljena?
In view of the results that the implementation of this new instrument has obtained up to now, would any modification be necessary of the budget provision for the period 2007-2010 which has not been spent yet?
Če je odgovor pritrdilen, ali bo prišlo do prerazporeditve sredstev ESRR in sredstev evropskega instrumenta sosedstva in partnerstva, ki sta jih prejela špansko-maroški program in atlantski program čezmejnega sodelovanja?
If so, where exactly will the ERDF budget and the ENPI budget allocated for the Spain-Morocco Programme and the CBC Atlantic Programme be transferred?