natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Finančni okvir za ukrepe znaša približno 15 milijonov evrov letno.
The budget for these measures amounts to around EUR 15 million per year.
Ukrepe, ki za ribiške trge začnejo veljati z začetkom veljavnosti spremembe uredbe št. 104/2005, bo generalni direktorat za ribištvo izvajal centralizirano.
From the entry into force of this amendment to Council Regulation (EC) No 104/2000, these measures relating to fisheries markets will be managed on a centralised basis by the Directorate-General for Fisheries.
Treba je spremeniti Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 104/2000, da se omogoči uporaba EKJS pri financiranju izdatkov za trge z ribiškimi proizvodi.
It is necessary to amend Council Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 in order to enable the application of the EAGF as regards the financing of the expenditure relating to fisheries markets.
Predlog Uredbe Sveta o spremembi Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 104/2000 o skupni ureditvi trgov za ribiške proizvode in proizvode iz ribogojstva
Proposal for a Council regulation amending Council Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products
o predlogu Uredbe Sveta o uvedbi posebnih začasnih ukrepov za zaposlovanje uradnikov Evropskih skupnosti zaradi pristopa Bolgarije in Romunije
on the proposal for a Council regulation introducing, on the occasion of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, special temporary measures for recruitment of officials of the European Communities
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Svetu ( KOM(2006)0271 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council ( COM(2006)0271 )
– ob upoštevanju člena 283 Pogodbe o ES, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C6‑0221/2006 ),
– having regard to Article 283 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0221/2006 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A6‑0312/2006 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6‑0312/2006 ),
Namen predloga te uredbe je dovoliti, da romunskim in bolgarskim državljanom dovoli opravljanje natečajev za zaposlovanje uradnikov še pred vstopom teh dveh držav v Evropsko unijo.
The proposal for a regulation in question is designed to allow competitions for the recruitment of officials of Bulgarian or Romanian nationality to be held before their countries accede to the European Union.
V ta namen je treba odstopiti od nekaterih določb kadrovskih predpisov, da se omogoči, da se osebe, ki niso državljani EU, prijavijo za delovna mesta uradnikov Skupnosti, ter da se omogoči opravljanje natečajev glede na državljanstvo in da se prosta delovna mesta ne objavijo nujno znotraj institucij.
To this end it is necessary to derogate from various provisions of the Staff Regulations so as to allow non-EU-nationals to apply for posts as Community officials, competitions to be held on a national basis and vacant posts not necessarily to be advertised within the institutions.
Predlog Uredbe Sveta o uvedbi posebnih začasnih ukrepov za zaposlovanje uradnikov Evropskih skupnosti zaradi pristopa Bolgarije in Romunije
Proposal for a Council regulation introducing, on the occasion of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, special temporary measures for recruitment of officials of the European Communities
o predlogu Direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o zahtevah glede kakovosti voda, primernih za lupinarje (kodificirana različica)
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the quality required of shellfish waters (Codified version)
(Poenostavljeni postopek - kodifikacija - člen 80 in člen 43 Poslovnika)
(Simplified procedure - Codification - Rules 80 and 43 of its Rules of Procedure)
(Postopek soodločanja: kodifikacija)
(Codecision procedure - Codification )
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2006)0205 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2006)0205 )
– ob upoštevanju člena 251(2) in člena 175(1) Pogodbe ES, na podlagi katerih je Komisija Parlamentu podala predlog ( C6–0152/2006 ),
– having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 175(1) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C6‑0152/2006 ),
– v skladu z medinstitucionalnim sporazumom z dne 20. decembra 1994 o pospešenem delovnem postopku za uradno kodifikacijo zakonodajnih besedil
– having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 – Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts
– ob upoštevanju členov 80, 51 in 43 svojega poslovnika,
– having regard to Rules 80, 51 and 43 of its Rules of Procedure,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A6‑0313/2006 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6‑0313/2006 ),
Predlog Direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o zahtevah glede kakovosti voda, primernih za lupinarje (kodificirana različica)
Proposal for a directive of the European parliament and of the council on the quality required of shellfish waters (Codified version)
o predlogu Uredbe Sveta o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 1321/2004 o vzpostavitvi upravljavskih struktur Evropskega satelitskega radio-navigacijskega sistema
on the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1321/2004 on the establishment of structures for the management of the European satellite radio-navigation programmes
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Svetu ( KOM(2006)0261 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council ( COM(2006)0261 )
UL C ... / Še ni objavljeno v UL. ,
OJ C ... / Not yet published in OJ. ,
– ob upoštevanju člena 308 Pogodbe ES, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C6‑0201/2006 ),
– having regard to Article 308 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0201/2006 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za industrijo, raziskave in energetiko ( A6‑0314/2006 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy ( A6‑0314/2006 ),
Predlog Uredbe Sveta o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 1321/2004 o vzpostavitvi upravljavskih struktur Evropskega satelitskega radio-navigacijskega sistema
Proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1321/2004 on the establishment of structures for the management of the European satellite radio-navigation programmes
o predlogu Uredbe Sveta o pravilih za prostovoljno modulacijo neposrednih plačil, predvidenih v Uredbi (ES) št. 1782/2003 o skupnih pravilih za sheme neposrednih podpor v okviru skupne kmetijske politike in o uvedbi nekaterih shem podpor za kmete ter o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 1290/2005
on the proposal for a Council regulation laying down rules for voluntary modulation of direct payments provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005
MNENJE Odbora za proračun .....................................................................................10
OPINION of the Committee on Budgets .................................................................10
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Svetu ( KOM(2006)0241 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council ( COM(2006)0241 )
– ob upoštevanju člena 37 Pogodbe ES, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C6‑0235/2006 ),
– having regard to Article 37 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0235/2006 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja ter mnenja Odbora za proračun ( A6‑0315/2006 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets ( A6‑0315/2006 ),
Razlog zanj je bilo zmanjšanje sredstev za razvoj podeželja (okrog 69 milijard namesto 88 milijard evrov), o katerem se je sporazumel Svet pod pritiskom enega odstotka držav, zlasti Velike Britanije, kar naj bi deloma nadomestili s prostovoljno modulacijo.
The background was the cuts in rural development funding which were agreed in the Council at the insistence of the 1% States, particularly Britain (around € 69 billion instead of 88 bn), which were to be partially compensated by voluntary modulation.
Parlament je proti temu nemudoma izrazil pomembne zadržke (gl. izjavo 9 Medinstitucionalnega sporazuma o proračunski disciplini in dobrem finančnem poslovodenju – v nadaljevanju MIS).
Parliament had immediately expressed strong reservations about this (see Declaration 9 on the Interinstitutional agreement on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (IIA)).
Sklep Sveta predvideva tudi t. i. pregled za skupne odhodke Unije, skupaj z odhodki za kmetijstvo.
The Council decision also provides for the EU's total expenditure, including that on agricultural policy, to be subjected to a 'health check'.
- države članice lahko v okviru prostovoljne modulacije vsa neposredna plačila zmanjšajo za 20 % (Svet je želel vključiti tudi tržne odhodke);
- Member States may cut up to 20% of all direct payments under voluntary modulation (the Council also wished to include market expenditure).
- za modulacijo ni nikakršnih mejnih pogojev, razen da so izvzeti mali prejemniki, ki prejemajo manj kot 5000 EUR neposrednih plačil;
- Modulation is not subject to any conditions, except that small recipients (i.e. those receiving less than € 5000 in direct payments) are exempt from it.
- s sredstvi se lahko prosto razpolaga v okviru določb uredbe o EKSRP; treba je spoštovati določbe o najmanjši porabi na os (Svet je menil drugače);
- The funds may be used freely in accordance with the provisions of the EAFRD Regulation; the rules on minimum expenditure per axis must be complied with (this was not what the Council advocated).
Presoja vplivov ni bila opravljena.
No impact assessment has been performed.
Države članice tudi močno podpirajo večjo prožnost, t. j. zlasti konec razporejanja sredstev po oseh, podaljšanje roka za prijavo, možnost za prilagoditev stopnje modulacije v obdobju financiranja, večja regionalizacija itd.
Member States are strongly in favour of a further increase in flexibility, i.e. in particular the abandonment of the earmarking of funds for particular axes, an extension of the declaration period, the possibility of adjusting modulation rates during the financing period, greater regionalisation, etc.
Parlament ne more potrditi predloga, ker:
Parliament cannot agree to the proposal because:
- predlog izkrivlja konkurenco in povzroča razlikovanje med kmeti v posameznih državah članicah, kar je v nasprotju s Pogodbo,
- it distorts competition and discriminates against farmers in individual Member States in a way which violates the Treaty,
- vodi do opuščanja oziroma ponovne nacionalizacije SKP ter opušča načelo solidarnosti v skupni kmetijski politiki,
- it entails the abandonment or renationalisation of the CAP and abandons the principle of solidarity enshrined in the CAP,
- ne upošteva ciljev Skupnosti za podeželje,
- it disregards Community objectives in rural areas,
- krši pravico EP do sodelovanja.
- it violates the EP's rights of participation.
Brez presoje vplivov ali zanesljivih številk Parlament ne more potrditi tako daljnosežne spremembe paradigem.
In the absence of an impact assessment or reliable figures, Parliament cannot consent to such a far-reaching paradigm shift.
Poročevalec ugotavlja, da je Parlament v Bögejevem poročilu za rešitev problemov pri financiranju skupne kmetijske politike predlagal obvezno nacionalno sofinanciranje odhodkov prvega stebra.
The rapporteur observes that, in the Böge report, Parliament proposed that the financing problems of the CAP be solved by means of compulsory national co-financing of first-pillar expenditure.
Zaradi sklepa Sveta se bo razprava o strukturi odhodkov za kmetijstvo v okviru pregleda zožila na vprašanja modulacije, kakor kaže napoved komisarke o širitvi obvezne modulacije po letu 2008.
The Council decision restricts the debate on the structure of agricultural expenditure in connection with the health check to modulation issues, as the statement by the Commissioner on the expansion of compulsory modulation after 2008 shows.
Očitno ne bo prišlo do odprte obravnave predlogov Parlamenta v Bögejevem poročilu.
There will evidently not be any sincere consideration of the proposals made by Parliament in the Böge report.
Posamezni popravki za nazaj ne bodo zadoščali, dosti potrebnejša je celostna obravnava vseh možnosti, na podlagi katerih bi lahko oblikovali koherentne in med seboj skladne predloge.
Individual retrospective improvements are not sufficient: rather, a comprehensive examination of all possible alternatives is needed, on the basis of which coherent and consistent measures could then be worked out.
A) Učinek na skupni kmetijski trg
A. Impact on the common agricultural market
Prostovoljna modulacija v predlagani obliki krši načela SKP in pravice prizadetih kmetov ter ogroža celotno kmetijstvo v Evropi.
Voluntary modulation in the proposed form violates the principles of the CAP, violates the rights of the farmers concerned and jeopardises the Europe-wide continuation of farming.
Predlog krši načelo nediskriminacije.
The proposal violates the ban on discrimination.
Temeljni načeli SKP sta enakost konkurenčnih pogojev in solidarnost (člena 33 in 34 Pogodbe ES).
The CAP is based on the principle of equal competitive conditions and solidarity (Article 33 and 34 of the EC Treaty).
S predlogom bodo možna velika nacionalna in regionalna odstopanja pri izračunavanju dohodkovne podpore Skupnosti (do 20 %).
The proposal permits large national and regional disparities in the calculation of Community income support (up to 20%).
Te razlike nimajo objektivne osnove.
These disparities are not based on objective principles.
V uredbi niso predvideni robni pogoji za izvajanje modulacije (delovna mesta, dohodkovna podpora na hektar idr.) niti v njej ni mehanizma, ki bi preprečil, da bi se konkurenčni položaj kmetov nesorazmerno poslabšal.
The regulation neither provides for any conditions (jobs, income support per hectare, etc.) for the implementation of modulation nor contains a procedure for ensuring that the competitive position of the farmers concerned will not deteriorate disproportionately.
Diferenciacija na skupnem kmetijskem trgu pri dohodkovnih podporah brez objektivnih meril je vendar v nasprotju z dosledno sodno prakso Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti.
Yet differentiation in the common agricultural market with regard to income support without the application of any objective criteria is contrary to the consistent case law of the Court of Justice of the EC.
Kršitev je še očitnejša, ker za predlog ni bila opravljena presoja vplivov.
The violation is all the more flagrant because the impact of the proposal has not been assessed.
Poleg tega bi zaradi predloga Komisije prišlo do znatne izgube dohodkov v kmetijstvu, ne da bi bila za to na voljo ocena posledic.
Moreover, the Commission proposal entails substantial losses of income for farmers without providing any estimate of the consequences.
Neposredna plačila se lahko po letu 2008 zmanjšajo za tretjino glede na stanje iz leta 2003 (20-odstotna prostovoljna in 5-odstotna obvezna modulacija ter 8-odstotna zmanjšanja po pristopu Romunije in Bolgarije), čeprav naj bi bila po sklepu iz leta 2002 plačila do leta 2013 zagotovljena.
From 2008, direct payments may be reduced by up to a third in relation to their level in 2003 (20% voluntary and 5% compulsory modulation, plus an 8% cut after the accession of Romania and Bulgaria) and this despite the fact that, according to the decision of 2002, the payments were supposed to be secure until 2013.
Do zmanjšanj bo prišlo v času, ko bo evropsko kmetijstvo v težavnem procesu prilagajanja (vse večja konkurenca na svetovnem trgu, reforma pomembnih tržnih ureditev, vse višje cene surovin idr.).
The cuts come at a time when difficult adjustment processes are under way in European farming (growing competition on the world market, reform of important common organisations of the market, rising raw material prices, etc.).
Zmanjšanja na kratki rok in poleg tega v takem obsegu ne bodo privedla do strukturnih prilagoditev, ampak do strukturnega zloma.
Cuts implemented in the near future and furthermore on such a scale will not result in structural adjustment but rather fracture the existing structure.
Kmetje sedaj potrebujejo gotovost, ki jim bo omogočila načrtovanje.
What farmers need now is certainty to enable them to plan.
Popolnoma bodo izgubili zaupanje v politiko, če se bo dane obljube kar naprej postavljalo pod vprašaj.
They will lose any faith they may have in political decision-making if undertakings which have already been given are constantly called into question again.
B) Cilji in načela razvoja podeželja
B. Objectives of rural development and the principles governing it
Za razliko od predpisov za vse ostale strukturne sklade in tudi od preteklih določb za modulacijo ta predlog ne predvideva sofinanciranja.
Unlike the rules applied in all the other Structural Funds and unlike previous provisions on modulation, the proposal does not provide for co-financing.
Vendar je sofinanciranje bistven instrument strukturne politike, ki zagotavlja, da so sredstva Skupnosti porabljena v skladu z načeli učinkovitosti in gospodarnosti in le tam, kjer dejansko ustvarjajo dodano vrednost.
Yet co-financing is an essential instrument of structural policy to ensure that Community funds are used in accordance with the principles of efficiency and economy and deployed only where Community funding genuinely possesses added value.
Glede na opazne probleme financiranja v nekaterih državah članicah (npr. na Portugalskem) z obveznim sofinanciranjem ne bi zagotovili enotnega izvajanja prostovoljne modulacije, saj bi na odločitev bistveno vplivalo stanje nacionalnega proračuna, manj pa vprašanja dohodkov kmetov ali potrebe podeželja.
In view of the perceptible financing problems in some Member States (e.g. Portugal), compulsory co-financing would mean that there was no guarantee of uniform application of voluntary modulation, as the decision would strongly depend on the national budgetary situation, with rather less consideration for the income situation of farmers or the needs of rural areas.
To še enkrat jasno kaže, da je predlog slabo premišljen izdelek na hitro, ki ogroža celovitost politike razvoja podeželja in ga ni mogoče rešiti s posameznimi naknadnimi popravki.
This once again makes it clear that the proposal is an ill-considered, over-hasty piece of work, which jeopardises the coherence of rural development policy and cannot be rescued by retrofitting it with a few improvements.
Že vnaprej je treba odkloniti še večjo prožnost, o kateri razpravlja Svet, npr. opustitev razporejanja sredstev po oseh, saj sicer ne bi bilo nobenih zagotovil, da so evropska sredstva porabljena v skladu z evropskimi cilji.
Increasing flexibility, which is being debated in the Council - for example, allowing the abandonment of the earmarking of funds for particular axes - should be rejected from the outset, as otherwise there would be no shred of a guarantee that European funds would be spent in accordance with European objectives.
V skrajnem primeru bi bila posledica predloga zmanjšanje že zagotovljenih celotnih sredstev za podeželje.
In the worst case, the proposal would result in the total funding allocated to rural areas being reduced.
Zmanjšanja v prvem stebru, ki je še vedno pomemben temelj kmetijstva, bi lahko uporabili za nadomeščanje nacionalnih sredstev sofinanciranja.
The cuts in the first pillar, which is still a cornerstone of farming, could be used to replace national co-financing funds.
V celoti gledano bi bilo potem iz prvega in drugega stebra ter sofinanciranja skupaj na voljo manj sredstev za podeželje kot pa sedaj.
On balance, taking the first and second pillars and co-financing together, less funds would then be available for rural areas than now.
Predlog vodi ravno v nasprotno smer od želene.
The proposal would have precisely the opposite result to that allegedly intended.
C) Ponovna nacionalizacija kmetijske politike
C. Renationalisation of agricultural policy
20-odstotna modulacija vodi do ponovne nacionalizacije kmetijske politike.
20% modulation would result in a renationalisation of agricultural policy.
Od skupne kmetijske politike bi ostalo le ogrodje.
No more than a rudimentary common agricultural policy would then survive.
Višina neposrednih plačil bi bila v pomembni meri v domeni držav članic, ravno tako pa tudi porazdelitev sredstev Skupnosti iz tega naslova.
To a significant extent, the level of direct payments would then be at the discretion of the Member States, as would the distribution of the Community funds gained from it.
Za zmanjšanja bi bila potrebna soglasna odločitev držav članic, prvi steber pa bi postal rudnik za nacionalne finančne interese.
Cuts would be a matter for unilateral decision by the Member States; the first pillar would become a resource to be mined to meet national financial needs.
Določeni niso nobeni pogoji, ki bi preprečevali diskriminacijo kmetov ali ki bi zagotavljali, da bodo sredstva uporabljena za odpravljanje obstoječih neenakosti ali za uresničevanje določenih ciljev Skupnosti.
There are no conditions to prevent discrimination against farmers or to ensure that funds are used to eliminate existing inequalities or to attain particular Community objectives.
Glede na širino ukrepov, predlaganih v drugem stebru, in zlasti, če bo Svet sprejel še daljnosežnejše predloge, bo le težko zagotoviti notranjo celovitost kmetijske politike Skupnosti.
In view of the breadth of the measures provided in the second pillar and particularly if more radical proposals were adopted in the Council, there would be little internal consistency to be found in the common agricultural policy any longer.
Sprememba paradigem!
A paradigm shift!
Skupna kmetijska politika se ponovno nacionalizira, finančne potrebe zanjo pa se prenašajo na Skupnost.
The common agricultural policy is to be renationalised, but the funds needed for the purpose Communitarised.
Ni si mogoče zamisliti tako daljnosežne reforme brez temeljitega posvetovanja s Parlamentom in prizadetimi.
Such a far-reaching reform without extensive consultation with Parliament and the people who would be affected is inconceivable.
D) Neupoštevanje Parlamenta
D. Disregard for Parliament
Sedanji predlog povsem jasno ne spoštuje pravic Parlamenta in ga tako ni mogoče sprejeti.
The present proposal flagrantly disregards Parliament's rights and cannot be accepted in this form.
Odhodki za razvoj podeželja so v skladu s Prilogo III MIS-a uvrščeni kot neobvezni odhodki.
Pursuant to Annex III of the IIA, rural development expenditure is classified as non-compulsory expenditure.
V okviru prostovoljne modulacije lahko države članice enostransko in brez vsestranskega sodelovanja Parlamenta v skladu s črko C MIS-a povečajo odhodke preko finančnega okvira iz Priloge I MIS-a za več milijard evrov.
Under voluntary modulation, the Member States could unilaterally and without the comprehensive involvement of Parliament in accordance with letter C of the IIA increase expenditure over and above the financial framework provided for in Annex I to the IIA by several billion euros.
Tako obsežna sprememba proračuna pri neobveznih odhodkih brez udeležbe Parlamenta je očitno v nasprotju z vsebino in duhom MIS-a.
Such a far-reaching change in the budget for non-compulsory expenditure without the involvement of Parliament clearly violates the spirit and the letter of the IIA.
Uvedba prostovoljne modulacije prejudicira rezultate pri pregledu proračuna, predvidenega za leti 2008/2009, ki naj bi bil podlaga za predloge za proračunsko obdobje po letu 2013.
The introduction of voluntary modulation prejudges the outcome of the budgetary health check planned for 2008/2009, from which proposals for the financing period after 2013 are supposed to be derived.