natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Predlog uredbe Sveta o splošnih določbah o Evropskem skladu za regionalni razvoj, Evropskem socialnem skladu in Kohezijskem skladu in razveljavitvi Uredbe (ES) št. 1260/1999
Proposal for a Council regulation laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) 1260/1999
Odbori zaprošeni za mnenje Datum razglasitve na zasedanju
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s) Date announced in plenary
Namestnki (člen 178(2)), navzoči pri končnem glasovanju
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote
o skupnem stališču Sveta za sprejetje uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o Evropskem skladu za regionalni razvoj in razveljavitvi Uredbe (ES) št. 1783/1999
on the Council common position for adopting a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Regional Development Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1783/1999
– ob upoštevanju skupnega stališča Sveta (9059/4/2006 – C6‑0187/2006 ),
– having regard to the Council common position (9059/4/2006 – C6‑0187/2006 ),
Sprejeta besedila, 6.7.2005, P6_TA(2005)0279 . o predlogu Komisije Parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2004)0495 )
Texts Adopted, 6.7.2005, P6_TA(2005)0279 . on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council ( COM(2004)0495 )
– ob upoštevanju priporočila za drugo obravnavo Odbora za regionalni razvoj ( A6‑0225/2006 )
– having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Regional Development ( A6‑0225/2006 ),
Na prvi obravnavi je Evropski parlament sprejel veliko pomembnih predlogov sprememb k začetnem predlogu Komisije, s katerimi si je prizadeval prirediti zakonodajo, ki ureja strukturne sklade, zlasti še Evropski sklad za regionalni razvoj, da bi se tako prilagodili potrebam precej drugačne Evropske unije.
At first reading the European Parliament adopted a number of important amendments to the initial Commission Proposal aimed at adapting the legislation governing the structural funds and in particular the European Regional Development Fund, to meet the needs of a much changed Union.
Tekom zadnjega programskega obdobja in zdaj, v razširjeni EU, smo vsi spoznali rastočo pomembnost varstva okolja ob hkratnem zagotavljanju gospodarske rasti, izboljšanju dostopa invalidnih oseb do javno financiranih zgradb, kar zagotavlja enakopravno obravnavo, in odpravljanju zapostavljanja v vseh oblikah.
Over the last programming period and now within the enlarged Union we have all learned the growing importance of protecting the environment whilst ensuring economic growth, improving access for the disabled to publicly financed facilities ensuring equality of treatment and eliminating discrimination in all its forms.
Trajnostni razvoj je uresničljiv le, če počiva na trdni osnovi spoštovanja teh temeljnih načel.
Sustainable development is only a viable concept if it is solidly built on respect for these fundamental principles.
Če je res, da si bo treba v naslednjem programskem obdobju močno prizadevati, da bo večje število zapostavljenih in nerazvitih regij ujelo bolj razvite regije, si je poročevalec vztrajno prizadeval, kolikor je bilo to le mogoče, da bi se izognili diskriminacijskim ukrepom, ki bi favorizirali eno ali drugo skupino držav članic.
If it is true that over the next programming period a particular effort must be made to enable a greater number of disadvantaged and underdeveloped regions to catch up with those which are more developed, your rapporteur has been ardent in his desire to avoid, in so far as possible, discriminatory measures favouring one or other group of Member States.
To ostaja glavna točka, ki jo je EP branil na pogajanjih s Svetom in ta odbor lahko z zadovoljstvom ugotovi, da so bile spremembe skupnega stališča zadovoljive.
This was and remains a central point that Parliament has defended in its negotiations with Council and it is with some satisfaction that the committee can note that the Common position has been adapted in a satisfactory manner.
Očitno bi bil poročevalec nedosleden, če bi se pretvarjal, da je popolnoma zadovoljen.
Obviously, it would be inconsistent of me to pretend complete satisfaction.
Navkljub stroškom širitve, večjemu številu manj razvitih regij in dodatnim naporom, ki so nujni za uspeh naših strukturnih ukrepov, so na voljo sredstva, ki so za 0,04 % nižja od zneska, ki jo je predlagala Evropska komisija s podporo EP.
Despite the cost of enlargement, the increased number of less developed regions, the extra efforts that have to be made if our structural policies are to succeed, we have resources which are 0.04% less than the European Commission with the support of Parliament, had proposed.
Pogajanja o finančni perspektivi in o medinstitucionalnem sporazumu so bila naporna in če bi se podaljšala, kar bi pomenilo možne zamude pri pripravi naslednjega programskega obdobja, je treba poudariti, da se to ne bi zgodilo po krivdi EP.
Negotiations on the Financial Perspective and the Inter-institutional agreement were arduous and if they were prolonged, inferring possible delays in preparing the next programming period, it should be stressed that this was no fault of Parliament.
V naših pogajanjih s predsedstvom in z Evropsko komisijo smo bili dosledni pri naših zahtevah, vendar vedno tudi pripravljeni na sodelovanje.
We have, been consistent in our demands and cooperative in our negotiations with both the Presidency and the European Commission.
Za doseženi uspeh je bil odločilen prav ta sodelovalni duh.
It was this cooperative spirit that was conducive to the success we have achieved.
Eden najpomembnejših dosežkov je bilo precejšnje povečanje finančnih sredstev, namenjenih ozemeljski koheziji, kar je cilj, ki ves svoj pomen pridobi šele v okviru širitve.
Not the least of these achievements was that of having obtained a substantial increase in the financial resources dedicated to territorial cohesion, an objective which assumes its full, importance in the context of enlargement.
Poročevalec je že velikokrat opomnil, da je v časih proračunskega zategovanja pasov pomembno ne trošiti svoje energije in ostati osredotočen na trenutno nalogo.
As I have argued on many occasions, in times of budgetary rigour, it is important not to disperse one's energy and to remain focussed on the task in hand.
Zato je podprl stališče Evropske komisije, da bi morali biti napori za dosego cilja regionalne konkurenčnosti in zaposlitve usmerjeni v tri prednostne naloge, omenjene v predlogu Komisije.
That was why I have supported the European Commission's view that the efforts made to achieve the Regional Competitiveness and employment objective should be aimed at the three priorities listed in the Commission's proposal.
Poročevalec lahko z zaupanjem reče, da zahvaljujoč našim intervencijam ta cilj ostaja osrednji element regionalne politike in da bo velik del razpoložljivih sredstev osredotočen na te prednostne naloge, v skladu z željami EP.
I am able to say, with some confidence that thanks to our interventions this objective remains a central element of regional policy and that a high level of available resources will be concentrated on these priorities in accordance with Parliament's wishes.
EP ni bil samo uspešen pri zagotovitvi potrebnih sprememb pri varstvu okolja in drugih točk, omenjenih zgoraj.
Parliament has not only been successful in obtaining the changes required concerning environmental protection, and the other above mentioned points.
Glede na zgoraj na kratko opisana uspešna pogajanja poročevalec brez oklevanja priporoča, da se skupno stališče Sveta sprejme brez sprememb.
In view of the successful negotiations briefly described above, your rapporteur has no hesitation in recommending that the Council's Common Position be approved without amendment.
Skupno stališče Sveta za sprejetje uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o Evropskem skladu za regionalni razvoj in razveljavitvi Uredbe (ES) št. 1783/1999
Council common position for adopting a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Regional Development Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) n° 1783/1999
o predlogu Uredbe Sveta o ustanovitvi Kohezijskega sklada in razveljavitvi Uredbe (ES) št. 1164/94
on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing a Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1164/94
– ob upoštevanju predloga uredbe Sveta (9078/2006)
– having regard to the proposal for a Council regulation (9078/2006)
– ob upoštevanju zahteve Sveta za privolitev Parlamenta na podlagi člena 161, druga alinea pogodbe EU ( C6‑0191/2006 ),
– having regard to the request for assent submitted by the Council pursuant to Article 161, second paragraph, of the EC Treaty ( C6‑0191/2006 ),
– ob upoštevanju člena 75(1) Poslovnika,
– having regard to Rule 75(1) of its Rules of Procedure,
– ob upoštevanju priporočila Odbora za regionalni razvoj ( A6‑0226/2006 ),
– having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Regional Development ( A6‑0226/2006 ),
Temeljni cilji kohezijskega sklada
The basic objectives underlying the Cohesion Fund
Kohezijski sklad je bil kot del priprav na ekonomsko in monetarno unijo ustanovljen leta 1993 z maastrichtsko pogodbo.
The Cohesion Fund was set up in 1993 under the Maastricht Treaty as one of the preparations for economic and monetary union.
Pogoj za sodelovanje v ekonomski in monetarni uniji je, da države članice zmanjšajo javni primanjkljaj in nadzorujejo javni dolg.
On the one hand, Member States wishing to participate in economic and monetary union must reduce their public deficit and keep their public debt in check.
Hkrati morajo manj uspešne države poskrbeti še za bistvena vlaganja, ki bi jim omogočila, da dohitijo bolj razvite sosede in povečajo lastno sposobnost za rast.
On the other, less prosperous countries must invest heavily in order to catch up with their more advanced neighbours and increase their growth capacity.
Kohezijski sklad je bil torej ustanovljen z namenom, da se manj uspešne države s pomočjo iz sklada približajo konvergenčnim merilom, brez da bi prekinile investicije v infrastrukture.
Hence the Cohesion Fund was set up in order to enable the least prosperous countries to meet the convergence criteria whilst continuing to invest in infrastructure using the Cohesion Fund aid granted to them.
Člen 161(2) Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti določa, da: "Kohezijski sklad (...) zagotavlja finančne prispevke za projekte na področju okolja in vseevropskih omrežij v okviru prometne infrastrukture."
The second paragraph of Article 161 of the Treaty establishing the European Community states that: ‘A Cohesion Fund (...) shall provide a financial contribution to projects in the fields of environment and trans-European networks in the area of transport infrastructure.’
Cilj je torej, da se poleg že obstoječih instrumentov Skupnosti za regionalni razvoj vzpostavi dodatni sklad, ki bi pokrival področje okolja in prometnih infrastruktur skupnega pomena in bi pripomogel k gospodarski in socialni koheziji ter solidarnosti med državami članicami.
The aim is thus to establish a Fund which complements other Community regional-development tools in the field of the environment and shared-interest transport infrastructure, with a view to promoting social and economic cohesion and solidarity amongst the Member States.
Do sredstev iz kohezijskega sklada so upravičene zgolj tiste države članice, katerih BNP na prebivalca je manjši od 90 % povprečja v Skupnosti in ki imajo načrt za izpolnjevanje ekonomskih konvergenčnih meril iz člena 104 Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropski skupnosti.
The only Member States eligible are those whose gross national income (GNI) per inhabitant is less than 90% of the Community average and which have introduced a programme designed to enable the economic convergence criteria laid down in Article 104 of the Treaty establishing the European Community to be met.
Dopolnitve uredbe o kohezijskem skladu
Adjustments to the regulation establishing the Cohesion Fund
Po širitvi Unije 1. maja 2004 se kohezijski sklad do zaključka obdobja 2000–2006 uporablja za vseh deset novih držav članic in za tri države članice EU-15, to je Španijo, Portugalsko in Grčijo.
Since the EU underwent enlargement on 1 May 2004 the Cohesion Fund has been applied to the ten new Member States and it will also apply until the end of the 2000-2006 period to three Member States (Spain, Portugal and Greece) which were beneficiaries in the 15-Member EU.
S pomočjo iz sklada bodo najmanj razvite regije deležne podpore v skladu s konvergenčnim ciljem.
Thanks to assistance from the Fund, the less developed regions will be covered by the ‘convergence’ objective.
Vseeno pa je bila uredba na osnovi razprave v Evropskem parlamentu in med pogajanji z drugimi institucijami bistveno dopolnjena.
However, essential adjustments have been made to the Regulation in the course of the debate within Parliament and the negotiations with the other institutions.
Povečanje obsega finančnih sredstev kohezijskega sklada z 18 milijard evrov (za obdobje 2000–2006) na 61 558 243 811 evrov (58 308 243 811 evrov + 3 250 000 000 evrov za prehodno in specifično pomoč iz člena 7a, odstavek 3 – člen 16(c) in 16(d) splošne uredbe) je pomembno, saj bo sredstva iz kohezijskega sklada uporabila več kot polovica držav članic.
The increase in the Cohesion Fund budget from EUR 18 billion (for the 2000-2006 period) to EUR 61 558 243 811 (EUR 58 308 243 811 + EUR 3.25 billion euros for the temporary specific support referred to in Article 7a(3) - Article 16(c) and (d) of the General Regulation) is substantial on account of the fact that over half the Member States will be Cohesion Fund beneficiaries.
Razširitev področja uporabe ukrepov kohezijskega sklada ustreza določilom iz pogodbe in prednostnim nalogam, opredeljenim v Lizboni, istočasno pa se sklada z vidiki trajnostnega razvoja, kot so bili začrtani v Göteborgu.
Enlarging the scope of Cohesion Fund activities is in accordance with the corresponding Treaty provisions and in line with the priorities set at Lisbon, and it accords with the Göteborg plans for sustainable development.
Na ta način se bo mogoče odzvati na nujne finančne potrebe, ki jih imajo države članice upravičenke na področju okolja in transporta.
Hence it will enable the beneficiary Member States’ major requirement for funding in the environment and transport fields to be met.
Porazdelitev financiranja Skupnosti med okoljski in transportni sektor mora biti uravnotežena.
Community funding must be divided equitably between the eligible environment and transport sectors.
Prednost pri pridobitvi sredstev iz kohezijskega sklada bodo še naprej imeli vseevropsko prometno omrežje, projekti evropskega pomena in okoljska infrastruktura.
Trans-European transport networks in particular, projects of European interest and environment-related infrastructure still have a priority claim on Cohesion Fund financing.
Novost, ki jo prinaša uredba je ta, da glede na sprejete prednostne naloge iz Göteborga sklad v večji meri prispeva k trajnostnemu razvoju.
The change made under the Regulation is that, pursuant to the Göteborg priorities, the Cohesion Fund will make a greater contribution to sustainable development.
Tako se odslej iz sklada lahko financirajo projekti s področja prevoza, tudi če niso del vseevropskih omrežij, npr. železnica, rečne in morske plovne poti, programi multimodalnega prevoza, trajnostni mestni prevoz, s področja trajnostnega okoljskega razvoja pa denimo ključni sektorji za energetsko učinkovitost in obnovljive vire energije.
Hence it may in future be used to finance non-trans-European network transport projects concerning the railways, transport by river and sea, multimodal transport programmes and sustainable urban transport, and also in areas which encourage sustainable development with an environmental dimension, such as the key sectors of energy efficiency and renewable energy sources.
V obdobju 2007–2013 se bosta kohezijski sklad in evropski sklad za regionalni razvoj (ESRR) glede prometne in okoljske infrastrukture upravljala po sistemu enotnega načrtovanja, kar bo omogočalo večjo sinergijo.
For the 2007-2013 period and in the case of transport and environment infrastructure, the Cohesion Fund and the ERDF will be run on the basis of a single programming system in order to facilitate greater synergy.
Vseeno pa velja, da mora Komisija posebej sprejeti vsak večji projekt, katerega skupni znesek presega 25 milijonov evrov za okolje in 50 milijonov evrov za druga področja, ne glede na to, da bo potem voden znotraj ustreznega programa.
However, major projects whose total cost exceeds EUR 25 million in the case of the environment and EUR 50 million in the case of other sectors will be adopted separately by the Commission but will be implemented as part of the programmes relating to them.
Evropski parlament je oblikoval več predlogov za dopolnitev besedila uredbe glede zlasti varovanja okolja, vprašanja hendikepiranih oseb, poenostavitve postopkov in preglednosti, večje vloge regionalnih dejavnikov in uveljavitve "sistema premij".
The European Parliament put forward a number of proposals which ‘beefed up’ the text of the Regulation by emphasising environmental protection, the major issue of the disabled, transparency and the simplification of procedures, a greater role for regional players and the introduction of a ‘premium system’.
Kot poročevalec obžalujem, da nekaterih med njimi Svet ni želel upoštevati.
As rapporteur I regret the fact that the Council saw no need to accept some of those proposals.
Kar zadeva vprašanje invalidnih oseb, je Parlament predlagal, da se v členu 2, ki opredeljuje področje uporabe uredbe, te osebe izrecno omenijo.
In particular, as regards the issue of disabled people, Parliament proposed that Article 2 (concerning the scope of the Regulation) should contain a specific reference to the disabled.
Svet je predlog zavrnil in se zadovoljil z eno samo tovrstno referenco v členu 14 splošne uredbe.
The Council rejected this proposal, preferring to insert a single reference in Article 14 of the General Regulation.
Kljub poenostavitvi, decentralizaciji in bolj strateškemu načrtovanju, sem kot poročevalec želel, da Komisija v fazi načrtovanja pripravi seznam okvirnih ciljev, s čimer bi bila zagotovljena kakovost in lažja presoja rezultatov projektov, pa tudi učinkovitost financiranja Skupnosti.
Despite the simplification, the decentralisation and the more strategic programming, I as rapporteur wished to draw up (during the Commission’s programming stage) a list of indicative priorities relating to the quality and the assessment of project results and the effectiveness of Community funding.
Predlagal sem tudi uvedbo "sistema premij" v obliki rezerve Skupnosti za kakovost in uspešnost, ki za strukturne sklade v obdobju 2000-2006 ni predvidena (členi 20, 48, 49 splošne uredbe).
I also proposed introducing a ‘premium system’ in the form of ‘Community quality and performance reserve’ which for the 2000-2006 period will apply only to the Structural Funds (Articles 20, 48 and 49 of the proposal for a General Regulation).
Ker se cilj kohezijskega sklada razlikuje od strukturnih skladov, ki naj bi nadomestili nacionalne proračunske izdatke in na ta način brez notranjega regionalnega razlikovanja podprli projekte v državah članicah upravičenkah, je kohezijski sklad za obdobje 2007–2013 izjemnega pomena, saj bo zaradi širitve do njegovih intervencij upravičenih več kot polovica držav članic.
In view of the fact that the purpose of the Cohesion Fund differs from that of the Structural Funds (which are intended to replace national budgetary expenditure in order to support projects in the beneficiary Member States without any internal regional differentiation), the Cohesion Fund is extremely important for the 2007-2013 period, since over half of the Member States in the enlarged EU will receive money from it.
Poleg tega bo financiranje Skupnosti kar trikrat višje od razpoložljivih sredstev v predhodnem obdobju.
Furthermore, Community financing will be three times higher than in the preceding period.
Kot poročevalec sem se zavzel, da se za kohezijski sklad uvede pravilo o samodejnem prenehanju prevzete obveznosti (pravilo N+2).
Unfortunately, the Council did not think that such suggestions needed to be adopted.
Če bi namreč za kohezijski sklad veljala ista pravila kot za ESSR in ESS, bi to lahko vodilo v hitrejšo porabo sredstev iz sklada.
As rapporteur I was in favour of incorporating automatic release (the N+2 rule) into the Cohesion Fund - making the Cohesion Fund subject to the same rules as those applicable to the ERDF and the ESF would have enabled rapid use of Cohesion Fund resources to be encouraged.
Izkušnje iz tekočega obdobja kažejo, da je pravilo prispevalo k učinkovitosti in disciplini, tako kar zadeva skrbno in natančno pripravljene projekte kot samo upravljanje strukturnih skladov.
Experience gained during the current period indicates that the rule in question made effective discipline possible in the careful, accurate preparation of projects and the management of the Structural Funds.
Svet je sklenil, da se bo med prehodnim obdobjem uporabilo pravilo N+3, pri čemer se bodo upoštevale težave, ki nastopajo pri upravljanju velikih projektov.
However, the Council has decided to apply the N+3 rule for a transitional period, in view of the difficulties associated with the management of major projects.
Predlog Uredbe Sveta o ustanovitvi Kohezijskega sklada in razveljavitvi Uredbe (ES) št. 1164/94
Proposal for a Council regulation establishing a Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1164/94
o skupnem stališču Sveta za sprejetje uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in sveta o Evropski skupini za ozemeljsko sodelovanje
on the Council common position for adopting a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a European grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC)
– ob upoštevanju skupnega stališča Sveta (9062/2/2006 – C6‑0189/2006 ),
– having regard to the Council common position (9062/2/2006– C6‑0189/2006 ),
Besedila, sprejeta 6.7.2005, P6_TA(2005)0280 . o predlogu Komisije Parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2004)0496 )
Texts Adopted , P6_TA(2005)0280 , 6.7.2005. on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council ( COM(2004)0496 )
– ob upoštevanju spremenjenega predloga Komisije ( KOM(2006)0094 )
– having regard to the amended Commission proposal ( COM(2006)0094 )
– ob upoštevanju priporočila za drugo obravnavo Odbora za regionalni razvoj ( A6‑0227/2006 )
– having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Regional Development ( A6‑0227/2006 ),
Namen predloga Komisije o Evropski skupini za čezmejno sodelovanje je okrepiti in spodbujati čezmejno, nadnacionalno in medregionalno sodelovanje, da bi dosegli socialno, gospodarsko in ozemeljsko kohezijo.
The purpose of the Commission's proposal on European Grouping of cross-border cooperation (EGCC) was to strengthen and promote cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation with the aim of achieving the objective of social, economic and territorial cohesion.
Ker se države članice, lokalne in regionalne oblasti pri izvajanju čezmejnih dejavnosti soočajo s težavami, je treba vzpostaviti instrument sodelovanja na ravni Skupnosti, ki bo omogočal ustanavljanje skupin za sodelovanje na ozemlju Skupnosti, ki bodo imele značaj pravne osebe.
In the course of difficulties encountered by the Member States, local and regional authorities in carrying out cross-border actions, it is necessary to establish a cooperation instrument at the Community level, which allows the creation of cooperative groupings in the community territory, invested with the legal personality.
Pridružitev k Evropski skupini za čezmejno sodelovanje ni obvezna.
Recourse to the EGCC should be optional.
Poročilo o evropski skupine za ozemeljsko sodelovanje je bilo na prvi obravnavi v Evropskem parlamentu julija 2005 sprejeto soglasno.
The Report on the European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) was adopted unanimously at first reading by the European Parliament in July 2005.