natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ob upoštevanju drugega pododstavka vsaka država članica proizvajalka iz Priloge razdeli dodeljeno kvoto proizvajalcem škroba za uporabo v tržnih letih 2007/2008 in 2008/2009 na podlagi podkvot, ki so na voljo za vsakega proizvajalca škroba v tržnem letu 2006/2007.
Each producer Member State referred to in the Annex shall allocate its quota among potato-starch manufacturers for use in the 2007/2008 and 2008/2009 marketing years on the basis of the sub-quotas available to each manufacturer in 2006/2007, subject to application of the second subparagraph.
Ob upoštevanju drugega pododstavka vsaka država članica proizvajalka iz Priloge razdeli dodeljeno kvoto proizvajalcem škroba za uporabo v tržnih letih 2007/2008 , 2008/2009 , 2009/2010 in 2010/2011 na podlagi podkvot, ki so na voljo za vsakega proizvajalca škroba v tržnem letu 2006/2007.
Each producer Member State referred to in the Annex shall allocate its quota among potato-starch manufacturers for use in the 2007/2008 , 2008/2009 , 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 marketing years on the basis of the sub-quotas available to each manufacturer in 2006/2007, subject to application of the second subparagraph.
Člen 3 (Uredba (ES) št.1868/94)
Article 3 (Regulation (EC) No 1868/94)
Komisija najkasneje do 1. januarja 2009 Svetu predloži poročilo o delovanju sistema kvot v Skupnosti skupaj z ustreznimi predlogi.
The Commission shall present the Council, before 1 January 2009 , with a report on the functioning of the quota system within the Community, accompanied by appropriate proposals.
To poročilo upošteva razvoj trgov krompirjevega in žitnega škroba.
This report shall take account of developments on the potato starch and cereal starch markets.
Komisija najkasneje do 1. januarja 2011 Svetu predloži poročilo o delovanju sistema kvot v Skupnosti skupaj z ustreznimi predlogi.
The Commission shall present the Council, before 1 January 2011 , with a report on the functioning of the quota system within the Community, accompanied by appropriate proposals.
Ne glede na to Komisija Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu še pred tem rokom predloži poročilo o vplivih, kadar se izvozna nadomestila in uvozne dajatve za škrob iz tapioke znižajo na osnovi sporazuma v okviru STO.
However, should an agreement within the WTO lead to a reduction in export refunds and in the import duties for tapioca-starch, the Commission shall present the European Parliament and the Council with an impact report before that deadline.
Vse večje spremembe zunanjih pogojev, ki izvirajo iz sporazumov v okviru STO, imajo lahko velik vpliv na celotni sektor.
Any major changes to the external arrangements resulting from an agreement within the WTO could have a substantial impact on the entire sector.
Kadar pride do tega, mora Komisija oceniti nove razmere.
Should this happen, the Commission would need to assess the new situation.
Svet za kmetijstvo in ribištvo ter Komisija nista upoštevala mnenja, ki ga je Parlament izrazil v svoji resoluciji z dne 11. maja 2005, ko se je zavzel za sistem kvot, ki bi se obnavljal na štiri leta, in za možnost prenosa neporabljenih kvot v korist novih držav članic.
The Agriculture and Fisheries Council and the Commission failed to take on board the position expressed by Parliament in its resolution of 11 May 2005, in which it held that the quota system should be rolled over for four years and that a balancing-out arrangement should be introduced for quotas not taken up, with preference being given to the new Member States.
Na seji Sveta 30. maja 2005 je Komisija izrazila pripravljenost za preučitev predlogov Poljske in Litve, da bi se njune kvote za krompirjev škrob pregledovale v okviru prihodnjih sporazumov, ki bodo sledili dvoletni obnovitvi sedanjih kvot.
At the Council meeting of 30 May 2005, the Commission said that it was willing to consider Polish and Lithuanian proposals for their potato-starch quotas to be reviewed in connection with future agreements following the two-year roll-over of the current quotas.
Komisija je že petič od leta 1994, ko je bil uveden sedanji sistem proizvodnih kvot, predlagala, da se sistem obnovi samo za dve leti.
For the fifth time since 1994, when the current production quota system has been introduced, the Commission propose to roll-over the system for only two years.
Po mnenju poročevalca je treba spremeniti dva vidika predloga: obdobje in količine.
For the rapporteur, the proposition has to be amended on two aspects: the period and the quantities.
Evropske kvote za proizvodnjo krompirjevega škroba so se vselej dodeljevale za obdobje treh let, z edino izjemo leta 2004.
The European potato starch production quota were always allocated for a three-years period, the only exception was made in 2004.
Tedaj je Evropski parlament predlagal štiriletno obdobje, vendar je Komisija predlagano spremembo zavrnila in mora znova predlagati podaljšanje sistema za dve leti.
At that time, the European Parliament proposed a four-years period but this amendment was rejected by the Commission with the result that the Commission has to present again a new prolongation of the system for two years!
Obdobje dveh let je dejansko veliko prekratko.
Actually, a two-years period is very to short.
Industrija potrebuje boljši pregled nad okvirom, v katerem se bo morala v prihodnosti razvijati.
The industry needs a better visibility to the framework in which it has to develop in the future.
To pa je pomembno tudi za kmete.
This is also important for the farmers.
Kmetje morajo že v tem letu pridelati semenski krompir, ki ga bodo imeli kot osnovo za izpolnitev dobavnih obveznosti, predvidenih čez dve leti.
Farmers have to grow seed potatoes this year to have enough material to comply with their anticipated supply commitments two years from now.
To dolgoročno načrtovanje je še toliko bolj pomembno, ker je škrobni krompir poljščina, ki je ni mogoče skladiščiti, kot na primer žitne pridelke.
This long term planning is even more important as starch potatoes are a crop, which cannot be stored like cereals crops.
Glede na današnje odločitve z zvezi s pridelavo semenskega krompirja se pridelovalci krompirja odločajo tudi za kolobarjenje v dveh ali treh letih.
Depending on seed potato growing decisions today, potato farmers make as well choices on their crop rotation in two or three years from now.
Povprečna kvota za proizvodnjo škroba po sedanjih predpisih znaša 1.948.761 ton; od tega je bilo 1.762.148 ton dodeljenih državam EU-15, 186.613 ton pa državam EU-10.
The overall starch production quota under current regulations amounts to 1 948 761 tonnes, of which 1 762 148 tonnes are allocated to EU-15 states, and 186 613 tonnes to EU-10 states.
To pomeni, da je bilo 90,4 % skupne kvote dodeljene državam EU-15, zgolj 9,6 % pa državam EU-10.
That is to say, 90,4% of the total quota is allocated to the EU-15, with a bare 9,6% to EU-10 states.
To razmerje ne ustreza razporejenosti pridelave krompirja: EU-15 - 70%, EU-10 - 30%.
This proportion doesn't correspond to the distribution of potato production: EU-15 - 70%, EU-10 - 30%.
Na Poljskem je največje pridelovalno območje za krompir v Evropi, kljub temu pa dodelitev pridelovalnih kvot ne pokriva niti nacionalnih potreb (poraba škroba in izdelkov iz škroba je s 4,5 kg na prebivalca v letu 1994 porasla na 18,5 kg v letu 2006), zaradi česar je Poljska, največja pridelovalka krompirja v Evropi, začela uvažati krompirjev škrob.
Poland has the largest potato‑growing area in Europe, yet their allocation of production quotas does not even cover national demand (per capita consumption of starch and starch products in Poland rose from 4.5 kg in 1994 to 18.5 kg in 2006) with the result that Poland, the largest producer of potatoes in Europe, has become an importer of potato starch.
Na ta račun se vidno veča trgovinski primanjkljaj pri trgovanju s škrobom in izdelki iz škroba, predvsem kot posledica omejitev, ki veljajo za obseg proizvodnje, dovoljen po pravu Skupnosti.
On account of this, the trade deficit in starch and starch products is visibly growing, largely as a result of the restrictions placed on the production volume permitted under Community law.
Zaradi nizke kvote niso omejene samo možnosti zadovoljevanja lastnih potreb po krompirjevem škrobu, ampak tudi možnosti za razvoj proizvodnje posebnih vrst krompirjevega škroba, kar bo privedlo zmanjšanja konkurenčnosti v primerjavi z drugimi načini proizvodnje škroba.
This weak quota does not only restrict the possibility to satisfy the internal demand of potato starch but limits also the possibilities to develop the production of specific types of potato starch and then will loose in competitiveness versus other types of starch production.
V okviru skupne proizvodnje škroba se jasno kaže, da žitni škrob že izpodriva krompirjevega, ki je čistejši in bolj kakovosten.
Inside the total starch production, it can be clearly seen that potato starch, which is purer and of a higher quality, is being supplanted by cereal starch.
Krompir izgublja bitko proti konkurenčnim surovinam za škrob, kot so koruza, pšenica in tapioka.
Potatoes are losing out to rival starch raw materials such as maize, wheat and tapioca.
Kot je zapisano v poročilu Komisije:
As indicated in the report from the Commission:
„Medtem ko je bila proizvodnja krompirjevega škroba ustaljena zaradi omejitve kvot, se je celotna proizvodnja škroba v Skupnosti (pšeničnega, koruznega in krompirjevega) od tržnega leta 1995/96 povečevala v povprečju za približno 4 % na leto.
'While potato starch production has been stable due to the quota limitation, total starch production in the Community (from wheat, maize and potatoes) has increased by approximately 4% per year on average since 1995/96.
Razlog za to rast je predvsem povečanje deleža pšeničnega škroba, medtem ko je delež krompirjevega škroba na celotnem trgu škroba enakomerno padal in trenutno znaša 20 % celotne proizvodnje škroba.”
This growth is mainly due to increases in wheat starch, while the share of potato starch in the total starch market has steadily decreased and now represents 20 % of the total starch production.'
Povečana proizvodnja krompirjevega škroba na Poljskem in v Litvi ne bi neposredno konkurirala običajni masovni proizvodnji, ampak bi pripomogla k razvoju industrije škroba v obeh državah in posledično tudi h konkurenčnosti poljskih in litovskih proizvajalcev.
An increased production of potato starch in Poland and in Lithuania would not directly compete with the ordinary bulk production but it would facilitate the development of starch industry in both countries and in consequence also the competitiveness of the Polish and Lithuanian producers.
To je zelo pomembno za gospodarstvo teh dveh držav, saj kot je Komisija zapisala v svojem poročilu: „Struktura industrije se med državami članicami razlikuje.
It is very important for the economy of these two countries because as it has been mentioned by the Commission in his report: 'The structure of the industry differs between the Member States.
V večini starih držav članic je proizvodnja zelo koncentrirana (približno 17 proizvajalcev si deli kvoto v višini 1,8 milijona ton), v novih državah članicah pa so proizvajalci večinoma manjši (približno 16 si jih deli kvoto v višini 0,2 milijona ton).”
Production is very concentrated in most of the old Member States (around 17 manufacturers share 1.8 million tonnes of quota) while in the new Member States manufacturers tend to be smaller (around 16 share 0.2 million tonnes of quota)'.
Z drugimi besedami:
That means:
Predelovalnice so zelo majhne in se nahajajo na podeželskih območjih, kjer imajo velik vpliv na lokalno gospodarstvo in razvoj teh območij.
Processing firms are very small and are situated in rural areas where they have a great impact on the local economy and on the development of those areas.
Takšna podjetja najdemo predvsem v regijah, kjer vlada strukturna brezposelnost.
Such firms are mainly to be found in regions suffering from structural unemployment.
Izrazito nizka kvota za Litvo je privedla do popolne prekinitve proizvodnje in 36-odstotnega porasta brezposelnosti.
An excessively low quota for Lithuania has resulted in the total discontinuation of production and a 36% rise in unemployment.
Na Poljskem je nižja proizvodna kvota, ki velja od pristopa te države k EU, povzročila zmanjšanje obsega pogodb, zaradi česar je bilo iz trga izločenih kar nekaj pridelovalcev (povprečno število pridelovalcev je padlo z 20.000 na 7.000), ki so bili prisiljeni poiskati druga tržišča za surovine iz pogodb, sklenjenih v preteklem obdobju.
In Poland, the lower production quota in force since the country's accession has automatically resulted in smaller contracts, and this has led to the elimination from the market of some growers (the overall number of growers has fallen from 20 000 to 7 000) who were forced to find outlets for raw materials coming under contracts concluded in the previous period.
Povečanje proizvodne kvote pa bi predstavljalo varovalo, ki bi omogočalo izpolnjevanje kvote tudi v primerih, kot so slabi vremenski pogoji, kakršne poznamo iz tržnega leta 2005/2006.
Increasing the production quota would, on the other hand, provide the safety margin required in order to ensure that the quota is met in the event of, among other things, bad weather conditions such as those which occurred during the 2005/2006 marketing year.
Če povzamemo, kvota za proizvodnjo škroba, ki jo je predlagala Komisija, ne odraža proizvodnih zmogljivosti poljskih predelovalnih obratov (od 1 do 1,1 milijona ton krompirja, predelanega med 100-dnevno rastno sezono), razpoložljivih surovin ter vse večjega povpraševanja po škrobu in izdelkih iz škroba.
To sum up, the starch production quota which the Commission is proposing fails to reflect the production capacity of Poland's processing plants (1 to 1.1 million tonnes of potatoes processed during the 100-day growing season), the raw materials available and the growing demand for starch and starch products.
Zmanjšanje proizvodnje škroba z dodelitvijo nižjih proizvodnih kvot ekonomsko ni upravičeno.
There is no economic justification for cutting starch production by allocating lower production quotas.
Z določitvijo nizkih kvot za Poljsko in Litvo bo proizvodnja manj donosna, kar bo oviralo razvoj sektorja krompirjevega škroba.
The setting of low quotas for Poland and Lithuania will make production less profitable and impede the development of the potato starch sector.
o predlogu Sklepa Sveta o sklenitvi Drugega dodatnega protokola k Sporazumu o gospodarskem partnerstvu, političnem usklajevanju in sodelovanju med Evropsko skupnostjo in njenimi državami članicami na eni strani ter Združenimi mehiškimi državami na drugi strani zaradi upoštevanja pristopa Republike Bolgarije in Romunije k Evropski uniji
on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of a Second Additional Protocol to the Economic Partnership, Political Coordination and Cooperation Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the United Mexican States, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union
mnenje Odbora za pravne zadeve o pravni podlagi .......................................7
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS ON THE LEGAL BASIS...............8
– ob upoštevanju predloga sklepa Sveta ( KOM(2006)0777 )
– having regard to the proposal for a Council decision ( COM(2006)0777 )
– ob upoštevanju Sklepa Sveta o podpisu in začasni uporabi Drugega dodatnega protokola k Sporazumu o gospodarskem partnerstvu, političnem usklajevanju in sodelovanju med Evropsko skupnostjo in njenimi državami članicami na eni strani ter Združenimi mehiškimi državami na drugi strani zaradi upoštevanja pristopa Republike Bolgarije in Romunije k Evropski uniji (16522/2006),
– having regard to Council decision on the signature and provisional application of a Second Additional Protocol to the Economic Partnership, Political Coordination and Cooperation Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the United Mexican States, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union (16522/2006),
– ob upoštevanju členov 57(2), 71, 80(2), 133(1) in (5), 181 v povezavi s prvim in drugim stavkom prvega pododstavka člena 300(2) Pogodbe o ES,
– having regard to Articles 57(2), 71, 80(2), 133(1), 133(5) and 181 in conjunction with the first subparagraph, first and second sentences of Article 300(2) of the EC Treaty,
– ob upoštevanju prvega pododstavka člena 300(3) Pogodbe o ES, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C6-0077/2007 ),
– having regard to Article 300(3), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0077/2007 ),
– ob upoštevanju členov 51, 83(7) in 35 svojega poslovnika,
– having regard to Rules 51, 83(7) and 35 of its Rules of Procedure,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za mednarodno trgovino ( A6-0138/2007 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade ( A6‑0138/2007 ),
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti in zlasti člena 57(2), člena 71, člena 80(2), člena 133(1), člena 133(5) in člena 181 v povezavi s prvim in drugim stavkom prvega pododstavka člena 300(2) Pogodbe ter prvim pododstavkom člena 300(3) Pogodbe,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 57(2), 71, 80(2), 133(1), 133(5) and 181 in conjunction with the first subparagraph, first and second sentences of Article 300(2) and the first subparagraph of Article 300(3) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti in zlasti člena 57(2), člena 71, člena 80(2), člena 133(1), člena 133(5) in člena 181 v povezavi s prvim in drugim stavkom prvega pododstavka člena 300(2) Pogodbe ter drugim pododstavkom člena 300(3) Pogodbe,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 57(2), 71, 80(2), 133(1), 133(5) and 181 in conjunction with the first subparagraph, first and second sentences of Article 300(2) and the second subparagraph of Article 300(3) thereof,
Parlamentu bi bilo treba protokol o prilagoditvi sporazuma o partnerstvu in sodelovanju, za čigar sklenitev se zahteva privolitev Parlamenta, posredovati po postopku privolitve v smislu člena 300(3) Pogodbe o ES in ne po postopku preprostega posvetovanja.
T his protocol of adaptation of a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, which requires the Parliament’s assent for its conclusion, should itself be referred to the Parliament under the assent procedure, within the meaning of Article 300(3) EC, rather than under simple consultation.
Sedanji predlog vsebuje edini člen o odobritvi sklenitve Drugega dodatnega protokola k Sporazumu o gospodarskem partnerstvu, političnem usklajevanju in sodelovanju.
The content of the present Proposal consists in a sole article approving the conclusion of the Second Additional Protocol to the Economic Partnership, Political Coordination and Cooperation Agreement.
Namen tega dodatnega protokola je izražen v členu 1, ki pravi, da "Republika Bolgarija in Romunija s tem postaneta pogodbenici Sporazuma o gospodarskem partnerstvu, političnem usklajevanju in sodelovanju med Evropsko skupnostjo in njenimi državami članicami na eni strani ter Združenimi mehiškimi državami na drugi."
The aim of the present Additional Protocol is expressed in its Article 1 which holds that "The Republic of Bulgaria and Romania are hereby incorporated as Parties to the Economic Partnership, Political Coordination and Cooperation Agreement between the European Community and its Member States , of the one part, and the United Mexican States, of the other part".
V členu je izražena namera o vključitvi dveh novih pogodbenic v osnovni sporazum.
That Article shows that the aim is to incorporate two new Parties to the main Agreement.
Poročevalec meni, da ne gre za bistvena vprašanja ter se strinja s širitvijo sporazuma o gospodarskem partnerstvu, političnem usklajevanju in sodelovanju na Bolgarijo in Romunijo.
The rapporteur believes that there are not important substantial issues at stake and agrees with the extension of the Economic Partnership, Political Coordination and Cooperation Agreement to Bulgaria and Romania.
Vendar pa je treba skrbno obravnavati pomembno pravno in procesno vprašanje: Komisija predlaga sklenitev dodatnega protokola k sporazumu o gospodarskem partnerstvu, političnem usklajevanju in sodelovanju z Združenimi mehiškimi državami na pravni podlagi, ki se razlikuje od pravne podlage za osnovni sporazum.
There is, however, an important legal and procedural issue that deserves careful consideration: the Commission is proposing to conclude the Additional Protocol to the Economic Partnership, Political Coordination and Cooperation Agreement with the United Mexican States on a legal basis different to that used as a legal basis for the Main Agreement.
Komisija na žalost te spremembe ne pojasni v obrazložitvenem memorandumu.
This change, is regrettably, not explained by the Commission in the Explanatory Memorandum.
Po skrbni preučitvi, v pričakovanju mnenja odbora za pravne zadeve in ob upoštevanju mnenja pravne službe, poročevalec trdi, da bi bilo treba sam protokol o prilagoditvi sporazuma o partnerstvu in sodelovanju, za čigar sklenitev se zahteva privolitev Parlamenta, Parlamentu posredovati po postopku privolitve v skladu s členom 300(3) Pogodbe o ES in ne po postopku preprostega posvetovanja.
After careful examination, pending the opinion of the Legal Affairs Committee and in view of the opinion by the Legal Service, the rapporteur contends that this protocol of adaptation of a PCA, which requires the Parliament’s assent for its conclusion, should itself be referred to the Parliament under the assent procedure, within the meaning of Article 300 (3) EC, rather than under simple consultation.
Zato poročevalec vlaga samo predlog o spremembi ene od pravnih osnov.
The rapporteur has therefore tabled a single amendment to change one of the legal bases.
Poročevalec predvsem predlaga, da se prvi pododstavek člena 300(3) pogodbe o ES nadomesti z drugim pododstavkom člena 300(3), s čimer se namesto preprostega posvetovanja zahteva privolitev Parlamenta.
In particular, I propose to replace the first subparagraph of Article 300 (3) EC by the second subparagraph of Article 300 (3) EC, thereby requiring the assent of Parliament instead of simple consultation.
Pravni razlogi za to spremembo so naslednji:
The legal arguments for this amendment are the following:
a) Sporazum o gospodarskem partnerstvu, političnem usklajevanju in sodelovanju z Združenimi mehiškimi državami (osnovni sporazum) je bil sklenjen na podlagi členov 44(2), 47, 55, 57(2), 71, 80(2), 133 in 181 v povezavi z drugim stavkom člena 300(2) in drugim pododstavkom člena 300(3) pogodbe o ES , s čimer se zahteva privolitev Parlamenta.
a) The Economic Partnership, Political Coordination and Cooperation Agreement with the United Mexican States (the main agreement) was concluded on the basis of Articles 44(2), 47, 55, 57(2), 71, 80(2), 133 and 181 thereof, in conjunction with the second sentence of Article 300(2) and the second subparagraph of Article 300(3) EC , thereby requiring the assent of Parliament.
Velja, da je bila privolitev Parlamenta zahtevana, ker sporazum "z uvedbo postopkov sodelovanja vzpostavlja poseben institucionalni okvir" v skladu s členom 300(3) pogodbe o ES.
It is contended that the assent of Parliament was requested because the Agreement established "a specific institutional framework by organising cooperation procedures" in terms of the second subparagraph of Article 300(3) EC;
b) Dodatni protokol spreminja osnovni sporazum in je njegov sestavni del.
b) The Additional Protocol modifies the main agreement and forms an integral part of it.