natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Kdaj namerava Komisija pripraviti celovit predlog prilagoditve obstoječega večletnega finančnega okvira novim prednostnim nalogam iz Lizbonske pogodbe in s tem dopolniti paket ukrepov, potrebnih za uskladitev trenutnih proračunskih struktur z zahtevami Lizbonske pogodbe?
When will the Commission deliver a global proposal to adjust the current multiannual financial framework for the new priorities contained in the Lisbon Treaty, to complete the package of proposals needed to align the current budgetary structures with the requirements of the Lisbon Treaty?
Kako namerava Komisija poskrbeti za pobude iz strategije Evropa 2020, pa tudi za različne pobude, ki jih je Evropski svet sprejel nedavno?
How does the Commission plan to provide for the initiatives outlined in the Europe 2020 strategy, as well as the various initiatives taken by the European Council recently?
Člen 312 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije navaja, da Svet sprejme uredbo o večletnem finančnem okviru.
Article 312 TFEU states that the Council is to adopt a regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework (MFF).
Člen 312(5) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije navaja: „ Evropski parlament, Svet in Komisija v postopku sprejemanja finančnega okvira ukrenejo vse potrebno za njegovo lažje sprejetje“ .
Article 312.5 TFEU states that ‘Throughout the procedure leading to the adoption of the financial framework, the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission shall take any measure necessary to facilitate its adoption’.
Kaj namerava storiti Komisija, da bi zagotovila izvajanje člena 312(5) omenjene pogodbe?
What does the Commission intend to do to ensure the implementation of Article 312.5 TFEU?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0076/2010
Question for oral answer O-0076/2010
v imenu skupine PPE Zadeva: Skupna zunanja in varnostna politika
on behalf of the PPE Group Subject: Common foreign and security policy
– Ker je Pogodba o Evropski uniji vzpostavila načelo o politični solidarnosti (člen 24) ter poudarja, da se države članice v Evropskem svetu in Svetu posvetujejo druga z drugo o vseh zadevah, ki se nanašajo na zunanjo in varnostno politiko in so splošnega pomena, da bi določile skupni pristop (člen 32),
– Given that the Treaty on the European Union has established the principle of political solidarity (Article 24) and stresses that Member States shall consult one another within the European Council and the Council on any matter of foreign and security policy of general interest in order to determine a common approach (Article 32),
– ker skupno stališče Sveta 2008/944/SZVP z dne 8. decembra 2008, ki opredeljuje skupna pravila glede nadzora izvoza vojaške tehnologije in opreme, določa osem meril za sprejemanje odločitev, o katerih se države članice strinjajo, da jih bodo upoštevale, ko bodo pregledovale zahteve za izvoz orožja, med njimi prejemnikovo skladnost z mednarodnimi obveznostmi, spoštovanje človekovih pravic, ohranjanje miru v regiji, varnost in stabilnost,
– given that Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP of 8 December 2008, defining common rules governing control of exports of military technology and equipment, details eight decision-making criteria that the Member States agree to respect when reviewing arms export requests, among them the recipient’s compliance with international commitments, respect for human rights, and the preservation of regional peace, security and stability,
Ali Svet meni, da se je glede na omenjena načela in skupno stališče o izvozu vojaške opreme v tretje države načeloma treba posvetovati v Svetu?
Is the Council of the opinion that military equipment exports to third countries should in principle be subject to consultations within the Council on the basis of the above- mentioned principles and common position?
Ali se je o izvozu orožja v tretje države že razpravljalo v Svetu in če da, o izvozu v katere tretje države?
Have arms exports to third countries ever been the subject of discussions in the Council, and if so, concerning which third countries?
UL L 335, 13.12.2008, str.
OJ L 335 of 13.12.2008, p.
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0077/2010
Question for oral answer O-0077/2010
v imenu skupine PPE Zadeva: Bonitetne agencije
on behalf of the PPE Group Subject: Credit rating agencies
Veliko kritike je bilo namenjene vlogi, ki so jo med sedanjo krizo odigrale bonitetne agencije.
There has been a lot of criticism about the role played by credit rating agencies (CRAs) during the current crisis.
Podcenjevale so kreditno tveganje, povezano s strukturiranimi kreditnimi proizvodi, in pogosto svojih ocen niso dovolj hitro prilagodile vedno slabšim tržnim razmeram.
They have underestimated the credit risk associated with structured credit products and often failed to adjust their ratings quickly enough to deteriorating market conditions.
Zaradi krize so se pojavili veliki dvomi glede sistema bonitetnih agencij.
The crisis has given rise to considerable doubts about the system of CRAs.
Na nekatere od teh pomislekov je odgovorila Uredba (ES) št. 1060/2009 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 16. septembra 2009 o bonitetnih agencijah.
Some of these concerns are addressed in Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on credit rating agencies.
Uredba sicer obravnava nadzorne vidike, preglednost in vprašanje navzkrižja interesov, ne odgovarja pa na naslednja pomembna vprašanja:
While tackling supervisory aspects, transparency and the issue of conflicts of interest, the Regulation failed to address the following important issues:
Ocenjevanje državnega dolga.
Ratings of sovereign debt.
Ali se zdi Komisiji razumljivo, da imajo bonitetne agencije, ki niso nujno pregledne ali odgovorne, tako ogromen vpliv na gospodarstva EU?
Does the Commission consider it reasonable that CRAs, without being necessarily transparent or responsible, have this enormous influence on the EU’s economies?
Kako namerava Komisija reševati to težavo?
How does the Commission intend to address this problem?
Ali se bo Komisija spoprijela s tem, da bonitetne agencije ne nosijo odgovornosti v povezavi z ocenami, ki jih pripravljajo?
Will the Commission address the absence of liability of CRAs in relation to the ratings they produce?
Oligopolna struktura trga bonitetnih agencij.
The oligopolistic structure of the CRA market.
Ali Komisija soglaša s tem, da je treba povečati konkurenco na trgu bonitetnih agencij?
Does the Commission agree that there is a need to increase competition in the CRA market?
Kako bi bilo mogoče okrepiti obstoječe evropske bonitetne agencije ali spodbuditi nastanek novih?
How could we strengthen the existing European CRAs or foster new ones?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0078/2010
Question for oral answer O-0078/2010
v imenu skupine ALDE Zadeva: Bonitetne agencije
on behalf of the ALDE Group Subject: Credit Rating Agencies
Čeprav je Uredba (ES) št. 1060/2009 o bonitetnih agencijah pozitivno prispevala k nadzornem okviru, zlasti z zagotovitvijo nekaterih pravil o preglednosti in navzkrižju interesov, je vloga bonitetnih agencij ob sedanji krizi požela obilico kritik in odprla vprašanje, ali sedanja ureditev zadostuje za nemoteno delovanje finančnih trgov.
While Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009 on Credit Rating Agencies (CRAs) made a positive contribution to the supervisory framework, particularly by providing for certain rules on transparency and conflict of interest, the role of CRAs in the current crisis has given rise to much criticism and raises the question whether the current arrangement is sufficient for financial markets to function properly.
Ali Komisija meni, da veljavna uredba zagotavlja zadostno medsebojno neodvisnost bonitetnih agencij in akterjev na finančnem trgu, da bi se izognili morebitnem navzkrižju interesov?
Does the Commission believe that the current regulation ensures that CRAs and financial market actors are sufficiently independent of each other to avoid any potential conflict of interest?
Če to ni tako, kako bo Komisija rešila ta problem?
If not, how will the Commission address this problem?
Ali Komisija meni, da so ocene, posebno kar zadeva državni dolg, objektivne, pravočasne in sorazmerne?
Does the Commission believe that the ratings, especially with regard to sovereign debt, are objective, timely and proportionate?
Kakšne ukrepe namerava uvesti Komisija za rešitev tega problema, če ni tako?
If not, what kind of measures does the Commission envisage to address this issue?
Ali Komisija meni, da je področje bonitetnih agencij prekomerno koncentrirano in v njem primanjkuje konkurenčnosti?
Does the Commission believe that the CRA sector is too concentrated and lacks competition?
Kako bi to lahko izboljšali?
How could this be improved?
L 302, 17.11.2009, str.1.
OJ L 302, 17.11.2009, p.1.
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0079/2010/rev.2
Question for oral answer O-0079/2010/rev.2
v imenu skupine PPE
on behalf of the PPE Group
v imenu skupine ECR
on behalf of the ECR Group
v imenu skupine S&D Zadeva: Obnovitev pogajanj z državami Mercosur zaradi sklenitve pridružitvenega sporazuma in posledice za kmetijstvo EU
on behalf of the S&D Group Subject: The implications for EU agriculture of the reopening of negotiations with Mercosur with a view to concluding an Association Agreement
Kolegij komisarjev je na srečanju 4. maja sklenil obnoviti pogajanja o pridružitvenem sporazumu med EU in državami Mercosur.
The College of Commissioners agreed at its meeting of 4 May 2010 to reopen negotiations for an Association Agreement between the EU and the Mercosur countries.
Sklenitev sporazuma na osnovi teh pogajanj bi bila za kmetijske proizvajalce EU precejšen izziv, zlasti v sektorjih govedine, perutnine, pšenice ter sadja in zelenjave.
Should an agreement result from these negotiations, it may present EU agricultural producers with considerable challenges, notably in the beef, poultry meat, wheat and fruit and vegetable sectors.
Posredno bi lahko slabo vplivala tudi na druge sektorje, med drugim na sektor prašičjega mesa.
There may also be indirect adverse consequences for other sectors including the pig meat sector.
- Natančno kakšna pooblastila so pogajalci prejeli v zvezi s kmetijskimi vidiki pogajanj?
– What is the precise mandate which has been given to the negotiators with regard to the agricultural aspects of the negotiations?
- Ali lahko Komisija predloži Parlamentu podrobno razčlembo verjetnih posledic, ki bi jih imela sklenitev sporazuma na osnovi teh pooblastil za evropske proizvajalce?
– Can the Commission provide Parliament with a detailed analysis of the likely impact on European producers if a deal is agreed on the basis of that mandate?
- Kakšne ukrepe, če sploh kakšne, namerava sprejeti Komisija, da bi proizvajalcem v EU, katerih gospodarski interesi bodo zaradi pridružitvenega sporazuma z državami Mercosur oškodovani, ponudila ustrezno nadomestilo?
– Which measures, if any, does the Commission intend to take to provide adequate compensation for EU producers whose economic interests are adversely affected by an Association Agreement with the Mercosur bloc?
- Kako bo pri proizvodih, uvoženih iz držav Mercosurja, zagotovila enakovredne standarde na področjih varnosti hrane, pogojev dela, varovanja okolja in dobrega počutja živali, kot so tisti, ki jih morajo izpolnjevati proizvajalci iz EU?
– How will it ensure that the standards, in terms of food safety, labour conditions, environmental protection and animal welfare, for the products imported from the Mercosur countries are equivalent to those demanded of EU producers?
- Kakšna je povezava med takim sporazumom in pogajanji o večstranskem sporazumu, ki potekajo na ravni Svetovne trgovinske organizacije?
– What is the relationship between such an agreement and the ongoing negotiations for a multilateral agreement at WTO level?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0080/2010
Question for oral answer O-0080/2010
v imenu Odbora za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve Zadeva: Kakovost statističnih podatkov Unije in okrepljene revizijske pristojnosti Komisije (Eurostat)
on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs Subject: The quality of statistical data in the Union and enhanced auditing powers by the Commission (Eurostat)
Kako namerava Komisija glede na nove pristojnosti, predvidene v uredbi, okrepiti spremljanje in ocenjevanje kakovosti podatkov, ki jih zagotavljajo nacionalni organi?
How does the Commission intend to strengthen the monitoring and evaluation of the quality of data provided by national authorities, taking into account the new powers provided for in the regulation?
Ali je Komisija v primerjavi z odločitvijo Sveta iz leta 2005, da Komisiji (Eurostatu) ne zagotovi vseh potrebnih orodij, zadovoljna s splošnim pristopom, ki je bil v Svetu sprejet 8. junija 2010?
Is the Commission satisfied with the general approach agreed in Council on 8 June 2010 compared to the decision by the Council in 2005 not to give the Commission (Eurostat) the necessary tools?
Kako bi želela Komisija srednje- in dolgoročno izboljšati kakovost evropskih statistik glede na to, da je mogoče gospodarsko upravljanje izboljšati le, če gospodarski nadzor temelji na natančnih statistikah ter standardizirani in mednarodno sprejeti računovodski metodi?
How would the Commission like to strengthen the quality of European statistics in the medium and long term, taking into account that improvements in economic governance are only possible if economic surveillance is based on accurate statistics and a standardised and internationally accepted method of accounting?
Ali je Komisija podrobneje razčlenila, ali so države članice spoštovale vse določbe Pogodbe ter ustrezne sekundarne zakonodaje in ali so namerno ali iz malomarnosti predložile ponarejene ali napačne podatke ali statistike?
Has the Commission undertaken any in-depth analysis of whether Member States have complied with all the provisions of the Treaty and relevant secondary legislation, and whether any have submitted falsifications or false data or statistics either intentionally or by neglect?
Ali je po mnenju Komisije zaželeno okrepiti vlogo Eurostata, da bi postal povsem neodvisen organ ali institucija?
Does the Commission consider it desirable to enhance the role of Eurostat, making it a fully independent authority/institution?
Ali se Komisija strinja, da je treba pristojnosti Eurostata razširiti, da bo lahko preglede na kraju samem izvajal brez predhodnega opozorila in opravljal razgovore s katero koli organizacijo, če bo menil, da je to za njegovo delo potrebno?
Does the Commission agree with giving Eurostat wider powers to make on-site inspections without any advance warning and hold interviews with any organisation it deems relevant to its work?
Zakaj je Komisija predlagala, da se za predlog kot pravna podlaga uporabi posebni zakonodajni postopek, to je člen 126(14) Pogodbe, čeprav člen 338(2) Pogodbe določa posebno pravno podlago v zvezi s kakovostjo statistik v EU in se obravnavani predlog ne ukvarja s čezmernim primanjkljajem kot takim?
Why did the Commission propose using a special legislative procedure, i.e. Article 126(14) of the Treaty, as the legal basis for its proposal, although Article 338(2) of the Treaty provides a specific legal base as regards the quality of statistics in the EU and the proposal under discussion does not deal with the excessive deficit procedure as such?
UL L 145, 10.6.09, str.
OJ L 145, 10.6.2009, p.
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0081/2010
Question for oral answer O-0081/2010
v imenu skupine GUE/NGL
on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group
Zadeva: Diskriminacija istospolnih zakonskih in zunajzakonskih partnerjev
Subject: Discrimination against same-sex married or in civil-partnerships couples
Komisija v svojem sporočilu z naslovom „Akcijski načrt izvajanja stockholmskega programa” (KOM(2010)0171) in z njim povezanem obvestilu 10/139 pojasnjuje načrte za zagotavljanje območja pravice, svobode in varnosti za državljane v obdobju 2010-2014.
In its communication ‘Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme’ (COM(2010)0171) and in the related Memo/10/139, the Commission explains its plans to ‘deliver justice, freedom and security to citizens (2010-2014)’.
V skladu s členom 13 Lizbonske pogodbe (PEU) lahko Komisija sprejme ustrezne ukrepe za boj proti diskriminaciji na podlagi spola, rase ali narodnosti, vere ali prepričanja, invalidnosti, starosti ali spolne usmerjenosti.
According to Article 13 of EU Lisbon Treaty (TEU), the Commission ‘may take appropriate action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation’.
V predlaganem načrtu stockholmskega programa za območje pravice na področju temeljnih pravic in državljanstva (Obvestilo/10/139) ni predlaganih konkretnih in ustreznih ukrepov, s katerimi bi istospolna zakonska ali zunajzakonska partnerstva vključili v področje uporabe člena 2 Direktive 2004/38/ES .
In the proposed plan for the area of justice, fundamental rights and citizenship of the Stockholm Programme (Memo/10/139), there is no proposal for a concrete and appropriate action to let same-sex partners, married or in civil partnerships, fall under Article 2 of Directive 2004/38/EC .
Ali to kaže na stališče Komisije, da okrepitev pravic istospolnih partnerjev ni pereče vprašanje in ga je mogoče odložiti do leta 2014?
Can it be concluded that the Commission is of the opinion that improving the rights of same-sex partners has no urgency and can be postponed even until 2014?
Ali se Komisija zaveda, da so v Evropi istospolni partnerji, zlasti če so poročeni ali živijo v zunajzakonski zvezi, izpostavljeni neposredni in posredni diskriminaciji pri delu, študiju in potovanju po EU, čeprav to na podlagi načela o nediskriminaciji iz člena 10 Pogodbe o delovanju EU (PDEU) ni dovoljeno?
Is the Commission aware of the fact that European same-sex partners, especially when married or in civil partnerships, can experience situations of direct and indirect discrimination when working, studying and travelling in the EU although, based on the principle of non-discrimination according to Article 10 of the Treaty on the functioning of the EU (TFEU), this is not allowed?
EU je Direktivo 2004/38/ES sprejela leta 2004.
Directive 2004/38/EC was adopted by the EU in 2004.
Državljanom Unije in njihovim družinskim članom zagotavlja pravico do prostega gibanja in prebivanja na ozemlju držav članic.
It grants citizens of the Union and their family members the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States.
Ali se Komisija, ob upoštevanju člena 10 PDEU, strinja, da bi se morala ta direktiva nanašati tudi na istospolne zakonske in zunajzakonske partnerje, ki se selijo v drugo državo članico?
Does the Commission agree, taking Article 10 of TFEU into account, that this directive should also apply to same-sex married or in civil partnership couples who are moving to another Member State?
Ali je Komisijo Direktivo 2004/38/ES pripravljena spremeniti tako, da bo istospolnim zakonskim in zunajzakonskim partnerjem pri selitvi v drugo državo članico EU zagotavljala enake pravice kot heteroseksualnim parom?
Is the Commission willing to change Directive 2004/38/EC in such a way that it gives same-sex married or in civil-partnership couples the same rights as heterosexual couples when moving to another Member State of the EU?
Vprašanje za ustni odgovor O-0082/2010
Question for oral answer O-0082/2010
Zadeva: Težave pri izvajanju uredbe o prehranskih in zdravstvenih trditvah na živilih
Subject: Nutrition and Health Claims Regulation: implementation problems
Uredba o prehranskih in zdravstvenih trditvah na živilih (ES) št. 1924/2006 vsebuje izredno dobre elemente, vendar pa še vedno ostaja nekaj nerešenih vprašanj, ki lahko povzročajo težave pri njenem izvajanju.
The Nutrition and Health Claims Regulation ((EC) No 1924/2006 ) has some outstanding features.
Do največjih težav prihaja zaradi premajhne jasnosti in preglednosti pri merilih za odobritev ali zavrnitev trditev.
However, there are still a number of problematic issues connected with its implementation.
Nadalje ostaja pravna negotovost v zvezi s tem, kaj je oziroma ni dovoljeno v prehodnih obdobjih.
The major problems in the implementation phase result from the lack of clarity and transparency as regards the criteria for approving or rejecting claims; furthermore, there is legal uncertainty as to what will or will not be allowed and in relation to transition periods.
Pri sedanji uporabi lahko pride do izkrivljanja konkurence zaradi sprejemanja trditev preveč postopoma in do nepotrebnih dodatnih stroškov, kar lahko prizadene zlasti mala in srednje velika podjetja.
The regulation’s current implementation may distort competition through the piecemeal approval of lists of claims, giving rise to unnecessary additional costs that may have a particular impact SMEs.
Uredba ne predvideva pravice do pritožbe in pravnih sredstev v primeru zavrnitve trditev iz člena 13, zaradi česar se lahko evropski industrijski sektor ob razširitvi trga malih in srednje velikih podjetij znajde v slabšem konkurenčnem položaju v primerjavi z drugimi izvajalci.
The regulation does not provide for rights of appeal or remedy in the event that Article 13 claims are rejected, and may put the European industry at a competitive disadvantage compared with third-country operators owing to the expansion of SMEs’ market.
Hkrati se bo prehrambeno industrijo s tem odvrnilo od naložb v raziskave in nove proizvode, kar bo vplivalo tudi na možnost izbire potrošnikov.
At the same time, food industries may be discouraged from investing in research and new products, which will also affect consumer choice.
To poročilo očitno ne zajema ekonomskih posledic za podjetja.
This report does not seem to cover the economic impact on companies.
Ali Komisija ni mnenja, da bi bilo treba pred sprejetjem končnega ukrepa izvesti novo vmesno oceno ekonomskih učinkov, glede na to, da imajo sklepi, ki se jih je doslej sprejemalo glede uporabe uredbe, še zlasti sprejemanje seznama trditev s prekinitvami, resne ekonomske posledice za podjetja?
Given that the decisions that have now been taken on the regulation’s application – in particular the batch-by-batch adoption of lists of claims – have a serious economic impact on companies, does the Commission not consider it important to conduct an immediate interim assessment of their economic implications before any final measures are adopted?
V uvodni izjavi 33 uredbe je zapisano, da mora Evropska agencija za varno hrano malim in sprednje velikim podjetjem nuditi ustrezne tehnične smernice in orodja.
Recital 33 of the regulation states that appropriate technical guidance and tools should be made available to SMEs by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).
Ali Komisija meni, da so zahteve iz uredbe ustrezno izpolnjene, če upoštevamo dejstva, da niso mala in srednje velika podjetja prejela nobenih smernic v zvezi s členom 13 o trditvah, da ni bilo oblikovanega nobenega orodja, s katerim bi tem podjetjem poenostavili izvajanje uredb, ter da je prvo srečanje zainteresiranih strani, ki ga je na to temo organizirala Evropska agencija za varno hrano, potekalo 1. junija 2010 kot zadnje v nizu?
Given that SMEs have not received any guidance regarding Article 13 claims, that no tools have been developed to facilitate SMEs’ implementation of the regulation, and that the first stakeholder meeting organised by the EFSA on this issue is supposed to take place by 1 June 2010 at the latest, does the Commission think that the regulation’s requirements have duly been fulfilled?
Ali je Komisija prepričana, da imajo podjetja dostop do vseh potrebnih informacij od vsega začetka?
Does it believe that companies have had full access to all the necessary information from the very beginning?
Če temu ni tako, katere ukrepe namerava sprejeti, da bi nadomestila pomanjkanje smernic?
If not, what measures does it intend to take to remedy this lack of guidance?