natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Čeprav pristojnosti Solvita omogočajo, da centri Solvit tovrstne zadeve zavrnejo, saj jih ni mogoče rešiti z neformalnimi sredstvi ali v desetih tednih, jih vse več obravnava te tako imenovane zadeve Solvit+.
Despite the fact that the SOLVIT mandate allows SOLVIT centres to refuse to take on such cases, because they are difficult to solve by informal means or within ten weeks, more and more SOLVIT centres are pursuing these so-called SOLVIT+ cases.
Na ta način se ne rešijo samo individualne težave pritožnikov, pač pa tudi podobni problemi v prihodnosti.
In this way not only are the individual problems of the complainants resolved, but also similar future problems are prevented.
Leta 2008 je rekordnih 17 centrov Solvit (v Avstriji, Belgiji, Bolgariji, na Cipru, v Češki republiki, na Finskem, v Franciji, Latviji, Litvi, na Nizozemskem, Poljskem, Portugalskem, v Romuniji, na Slovaškem, v Španiji in na Švedskem) obravnavalo skupno 32 zadev Solvit+, od česar so jih 12 sčasoma rešili, 20 pa jih na rešitev še čaka.
In 2008 a record number of 17 SOLVIT centres (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden) engaged in a total number of 32 SOLVIT+ cases, 12 of which were eventually solved, 20 are still pending.
Zelo spodbudno je, da celo tisti centri, ki imajo občutno premalo osebja, tovrstnih zadev ne zavračajo, čeprav so običajno zapletene in dolgotrajne.
It is very encouraging that even those SOLVIT centres that have serious staffing problems do not turn down these cases – which are usually complicated and time-consuming.
Poleg tega skušajo centri Solvit pogosto pomagati pritožnikom, čeprav njihova zadeva ni v neposredni pristojnosti Solvita (na primer čezmejne težave, ki niso povezane z zakonodajo EU).
Furthermore, many SOLVIT centres often try to help the complainants even if the case is not within the scope of SOLVIT (for instance, cross-border problems that do not concern EU law).
V zbirki podatkov Solvit je bila leta 2007 ustvarjena posebna, „nesolvitovska“ kategorija za beleženje tovrstnih zadev.
A special 'non-SOLVIT' category was created in the SOLVIT database in 2007 to record cases of this kind.
Med novembrom 2007 in oktobrom 2008 so centri Solvit obravnavali 250 tovrstnih zadev.
Between November 2007 and October 2008, SOLVIT centres handled 250 of such non-SOLVIT cases.
Leta 2008 je v Solvitu število zadev naraslo za nadaljnjih 22 % in prvič po ustanovitvi mreže je bilo v letu dni vloženih 1000 zadev.
In 2008, SOLVIT case flow grew by a further 22% and for the first time since the creation of SOLVIT the milestone of 1000 cases submitted to the system within a year has been reached.
Delež uspešnega reševanja ostaja pri 83 %.
The resolution rates remained high at 83%.
V istem času so pomanjkanje osebja in pogoste menjave v številnih centrih Solvit povzročili, da se je povprečni čas obravnavanja zadev podaljšal z 58 dni leta 2007 na 69 dni leta 2008.
At the same time, the shortage of staff and frequent changes in a number of SOLVIT centres resulted in the average case handling speed dropping from 58 days in 2007 to 69 days in 2008.
Tudi delež zadev, ki so bile uspešno rešene v desettedenskem roku, je padel z 79 % na 74 %.
Moreover, the percentage of cases solved within the ten-week deadline fell from 79% to 74%.
Da bodo rešitve resnično skladne z zakonodajo EU, potrebujejo centri Solvit ustrezno svetovanje o pravnih posledicah obravnavanih težav in predlaganih rešitev.
To ensure that solutions are compatible with EU law, SOLVIT centres need sound legal advice on the legal merits of the problems submitted and the solutions proposed.
Potrebujejo dobro dostopno svetovanje tako v centru kot pri upravi, ki ji pripadajo.
They need good access to legal advice both within their centre and within the administration of which they are part.
Kadar med državama članicama pride do razlik v pravnih mnenjih o zadevi, ki jo skupaj obravnavata, ali do zapletenih pravnih vprašanj ali pa v domači državi preprosto ni pravnega svetovanja, se centri Solvit po nasvet pogosto obrnejo na Komisijo.
Where there are differences of legal opinion between two Member States on the case they are handling together, complex legal issues or simply no proper access to legal advice in their country, SOLVIT centres often turn to the Commission for advice.
Ker pa število vprašanj iz teh centrov narašča, Komisija ne more vedno zagotoviti neformalnega pravnega svetovanja, kot bi centri Solvit želeli.
However, given the increase in the number of enquiries from the SOLVIT centres, the Commission does not always provide informal legal advice as quickly as the SOLVIT centres would wish.
Države članice bi morale zagotoviti, da bi bilo tem centrom ustrezno dostopno pravno strokovno znanje v domači upravi.
Member States should ensure that SOLVIT centres have proper access to legal expertise within their administration.
Komisija bi morala hitreje zagotavljati neformalne pravne ocene na zahtevo centrov Solvit.
The Commission should speed up the provision of informal legal assessments to SOLVIT centres on request.
Parlament je v resoluciji septembra 2008 o pregledu stanja notranjega trga pozval k natančnejšim informacijam o tem, katere direktive še niso bile prenesene, saj imajo v statistiki vse direktive enako težo.
In its September 2008 resolution on the Internal Market Scoreboard the Parliament called for more detailed information about which directives have not been transposed, since all directives have the same weight in the statistics.
Komisija bi z zagotavljanjem podrobnejših informacij o direktivah, ki se v posameznih državah članicah še ne izvajajo, na svojem spletnem mestu pripomogla k ozaveščanju širše javnosti.
By providing more detailed information on its website on the directives which have not been implemented in the individual Member States, the Commission would help raise awareness among the general public.
To bi omogočilo skupni pritisk, tudi pritisk poslancev Evropskega parlamenta na poslance nacionalnih parlamentov.
This would also enable peer pressure, also by members of the European parliament on members of national parliaments.
Tovrstne informacije bi bile zelo koristno orodje tudi za delo mreže Solvit.
Such information would be a very useful tool also for the work of SOLVIT.
Ukrepi, ki jih je treba predvideti
Measures to be envisaged
Poročevalec predlaga:
Your Rapporteur recommends the following:
Državljanom in podjetjem bi bilo treba čim širše sporočiti informacije o tovrstnih storitvah, prek vseh oblik občil na nacionalni, regionalni in lokalni ravni.
Information about such services should be communicated to Citizens and Businesses as widely as possible using all forms of media at national, regional and local levels.
Poleg tega bi morale države članice s podporo Komisije izboljšati zmogljivosti teh mehanizmov za reševanje problemov, zlasti Solvita, z dodatnimi finančnimi in kadrovskimi viri, za kar bi lahko uporabile Evropski socialni sklad.
Furthermore Member States should, with the support of the Commission, improve the capacity of those problem-solving mechanisms, particularly, SOLVIT by allocating additional financial and human resources using the European Social Fund.
Osebje Solvita bi moralo biti deležno usposabljanja, da bi bilo na tekočem s pravili notranjega trga ter poleg maternega jezika dobro obvladati angleščino in še kak drug jezik EU.
SOLVIT staff should receive training to be kept up-to-date on internal market rules and also have a sound working knowledge of English as well as another EU language, apart from their own mother tongue.
Vse vladne službe, ki obravnavajo zadeve, povezane z izvajanjem pravil notranjega trga, bi morale nastaviti uradnika za zvezo s Solvitom, ki bi zagotavljal učinkovito in uspešno komuniciranje med službami.
All government services dealing with matters related to the implementation of internal market rules should appoint a SOLVIT liaison officer to ensure effective and efficient communication between the services.
Vse države članice bi morale zagotoviti, da bi imele podružnico Solvita.
Each Member State needs to ensure that they have a SOLVIT antenna in their country.
Nazadnje in najpomembnejše, poročevalec meni, da bi morale države članice okrepiti svoja prizadevanja pri zagotavljanju informacij državljanom in podjetjem o njihovih pravicah na notranjem trgu ter jim tako omogočiti dejansko izvajanje teh pravic.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Member States should step up their efforts in providing information to citizens and businesses about their rights in the internal market enabling them to be able to exercise those rights in practice.
Projekt podpornih storitev enotnega trga bo, ko bo dokončan, omogočil lažji dostop do različnih informacijskih, svetovalnih, podpornih storitev ter storitev za reševanje težav, in jih poenostavil.
The Single Market Assistance Services (SMAS) project, when finalised will facilitate access to various existing information, advice, assistance and problem- solving services and streamline them.
Odbor za peticije poziva Odbor za notranji trg in varstvo potrošnikov, kot pristojni odbor, da v svoj predlog resolucije vključi naslednje pobude:
The Committee on Petitions calls on the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:
2. pozdravlja dejstvo, da so evropski državljani in podjetja leta 2008 zaradi dejavnosti mreže Solvit prihranili pri stroških približno 32,6 milijonov EUR;
Welcomes the fact that SOLVIT's activities have resulted in cost savings for European citizens and businesses, which are estimated to have amounted to EUR 32.6 million in 2008;
4. priznava učinkovitost mreže Solvit kot mreže za sodelovanje pri neuradnem reševanju težav, s katerimi se državljani in podjetja v EU srečujejo, kadar javni organi napačno uporabljajo zakonodajo s področja notranjega trga;
Acknowledges the effectiveness of SOLVIT as a cooperation network which endeavours to solve, on an informal basis, problems that arise for EU citizens and businesses as a result of the misapplication of internal market law by public authorities;
7. poziva mrežo Solvit, naj primere napačne uporabe zakonodaje EU, katerih reševanje je zanjo preveč zapleteno, preda Komisiji ali Odboru Evropskega parlamenta za peticije;
Requests SOLVIT to refer cases of misapplication of EU legislation which are too complex for it to resolve not only to the Commission but also, where appropriate, to Parliament's Committee on Petitions;
o „Europeani – naslednji koraki“
on "Europeana - the next steps"
MNENJE Odbora za industrijo, raziskave in energetiko .............................17
OPINION of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy ...............18
MNENJE Odbora za pravne zadeve ...........................................................................21
OPINION of the Committee on Legal Affairs ......................................................22
– ob upoštevanju sporočila Komisije z dne 28. avgusta 2009 z naslovom: „Europeana - naslednji koraki“( KOM(2009)0440 ),
– having regard to the Commission communication of 28 August 2009 entitled: ‘Europeana - next steps’ ( COM(2009)0440 ),
– ob upoštevanju sporočila Komisije z dne 19. oktobra 2009 z naslovom: „Avtorske pravice v gospodarstvu znanja“ ( KOM(2009)0532 ),
– having regard to the Commission communication of 19 October 2009 entitled: ‘Copyright in the Knowledge Economy’ ( COM(2009)0532 ),
– ob upoštevanju sklepov Sveta z dne 20. novembra 2008 o evropski digitalni knjižnici EUROPEANA
– having regard to the Council conclusions of 20 November 2008 on the European digital library EUROPEANA
– ob upoštevanju sporočila Komisije z dne 11. avgusta 2008 z naslovom „Do evropske kulturne dediščine s klikom na miško - Napredek pri digitalizaciji in spletni dostopnosti kulturnega gradiva in njegovem digitalnem arhiviranju v EU“ ( KOM(2008)0513 ),
– having regard to the Commission communication of 11 August 2008 entitled ‘Europe's cultural heritage at the click of a mouse - Progress on the digitisation and online accessibility of cultural material and digital preservation across the EU’ ( COM(2008)0513 ),
– ob upoštevanju končnega poročila skupine strokovnjakov na visoki ravni za digitalne knjižnice (podskupina o avtorskih pravicah) z dne 4. junija 2008 o digitalni hrambi, delih, za katera imetniki avtorskih pravic niso znani in razprodanih delih;
– having regard to the final report of 4 June 2008 by the High-Level Expert Group - Copyright subgroup- on Digital Libraries on digital preservation, orphan works and out-of-print works,
– ob upoštevanju končnega poročila skupine na visoki ravni za digitalne knjižnice (podskupina za javno-zasebna partnerstva) iz maja 2008 o javno-zasebnih partnerstvih za digitalizacijo in spletno dostopnost evropske kulturne dediščine,
– having regard to the final report of May 2008 by the High-Level Expert Group on Digital Libraries -Sub-group on Public Private Partnerships- on Public Private Partnerships for the Digitisation and Online Accessibility of Europe's Cultural Heritage,
– ob upoštevanju svoje resolucije z dne 27. septembra 2007 o i2010: na poti do evropske digitalne knjižnice
– having regard to its resolution of 27 September 2007 on i2010: towards a European digital library
– ob upoštevanju priporočila Komisije 2006/585/ES z dne 24. avgusta 2006 o digitalizaciji in spletni dostopnosti kulturnega gradiva in digitalnem arhiviranju
– having regard to the Commission Recommendation 2006/585/EC of 24 August 2006 on the digitisation and online accessibility of cultural material and digital preservation
UL L 236, 31.8.2006, str.
OJ L 236, 31.8.2006, p.
– ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije, zlasti njenega člena 167,
– having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and in particular Article 167 thereof,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za kulturo in izobraževanje ter mnenj Odbora za industrijo, raziskave in energetiko in Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A7-0028/2010 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education and the opinions of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A7‑0028/2010 ),
A. ker je v digitalnem okolju ključno, da se zagotovi in poenostavi splošni dostop do evropske kulturne dediščine ter zajamčita njeno spodbujanje in ohranitev za prihodnje rodove, tako v Evropi kot zunaj nje,
A. whereas in a digital environment it is essential to guarantee and simplify universal access to European cultural heritage and to ensure that it be promoted and preserved for generations to come, both within and outside Europe,
B. ker je pri digitalizaciji virov evropske kulturne dediščine evropska politika na področju kulture ključna, saj pomeni močno javno zavzetost Evropske unije in njenih držav članic za ohranitev, spoštovanje in spodbujanje kulturne raznolikosti,
B. whereas, with reference to the digitisation of European cultural heritage materials, a European policy in the field of culture is essential and shows a strong public commitment by the European Union and its Member States to preserving, respecting and promoting cultural diversity,
C. ker bi bilo treba čim bolj razširjati bogastvo in raznolikost skupne evropske kulturne dediščine, tudi zunaj Evrope, ter zagotoviti njeno dostopnost in ker je vloga držav članic in kulturnih ustanov, zlasti knjižnic, v teh prizadevanjih ključna tako na nacionalni kot tudi na regionalni in lokalni ravni,
C. whereas the wealth and diversity of the common European cultural heritage ought to be promoted and accessible as widely as possible, including outside Europe, and the Member States and cultural institutions, particularly libraries, have a key role to play in this endeavour both at national level and at regional and local levels,
D. ker je evropska kulturna dediščina sestavljena predvsem iz del, katerih uporaba je prosta, in ker bi moral biti v digitalnem svetu v čim večji meri omogočen dostop do teh del v visoko kakovostnih formatih,
D. whereas European cultural heritage is largely made up of works in the public domain, and access to them should be provided in the digital world as far as possible in high-quality formats,
E. ker mora biti dostop do kulturnih in izobraževalnih informacij ena od prednostnih nalog, da bi se izboljšali standardi izobraževanja in življenjski standard,
E. whereas access to cultural and educational information must be a priority in order to improve educational and living standards,
F. ker je treba oblikovati skupna merila za digitalizacijo evropske kulturne dediščine in ker števila digitalizirana dela, ki jih zdaj hranijo razne knjižnice, niso na voljo javnosti zaradi nezdružljivosti digitalnih formatov
F. whereas there is a need to establish common standards for the digitisation of European cultural heritage, and whereas large numbers of digitised works currently held by various libraries have not been made publicly available owing to incompatibilities between digital formats,
G. ker so knjižnice zaradi svojega osebja ustanove, ki so najbolj usposobljene za nadzor in upravljanje procesa digitalizacije del,
G. whereas, thanks to their staff, libraries are the institutions most qualified to supervise and manage the process of digitising works,
H. ker evropska digitalna knjižnica ne sme biti zgolj digitalizirana zbirka z orodji za upravljanje informacij, ampak mora vključevati tudi razvoj cele vrste virov in tehničnih zmogljivosti za ustvarjanje, iskanje in uporabo informacij,
H. whereas the European digital library should be more than a digital collection with information management tools, but should rather embrace the development of a whole range of technical capacities and resources for the creation, research and use of information,
I. ker je treba upoštevati nagel razvoj novih tehnologij in spremembe, ki jih ta prinaša v kulturnih navadah, pa tudi obstoječe projekte digitalizacije zunaj Evrope,
I. whereas account must be taken of the rapid development of new technologies with resulting changes in cultural practices, and of existing digitisation projects outside Europe,
J. ker je zato nujno, da države članice okrepijo svoja prizadevanja, združijo svoje moči in si priskrbijo potrebna sredstva za ohranitev in spodbujanje svojega prispevka k Europeani, ter s tem povečajo prepoznavnost Evrope v svetu,
J. whereas there is, consequently, an urgent need for Member States to step up their efforts, join forces and equip themselves with the requisite means to maintain and encourage their contribution to Europeana so as to raise Europe’s profile in the world,
K. ker je bil doslej digitaliziran le majhen del evropske kulturne dediščine, ker države članice pri tem različno hitro napredujejo in ker javna sredstva, namenjena za množično digitalizacijo, ne zadostujejo; ker bi morale države članice okrepiti prizadevanja za pospešitev postopka digitalizacije javnih in zasebnih del,
K. whereas only a tiny part of European cultural heritage has been digitised so far, Member States are progressing at different speeds, and public funding allocated to mass digitisation is insufficient; whereas Member States should step up their efforts to speed up the process of digitising public and private works,
L. ker bo digitalizacija evropske kulturne dediščine in znanstvenega gradiva koristila zlasti drugim sektorjem, kot so izobraževanje, znanost, raziskave, turizem, podjetništvo, inovacije in mediji,
L. whereas digitisation of European cultural heritage and scientific materials will benefit, in particular, sectors such as education, science, research, tourism, entrepreneurship, innovation, and the media,
M. ker je digitalna tehnologija tudi izjemen pripomoček za omogočanje dostopa do evropske kulturne dediščine osebam, ki se pri dostopu do kulture srečujejo z ovirami, in invalidom,
M. whereas digital technology also constitutes a remarkable tool for generating access to European cultural heritage for people coming up against barriers to their access to culture, including disabled people,
N. ker se avtorsko pravo med državami članicami EU močno razlikuje in ker je status avtorskih pravic pri številnih delih nejasen,
N. whereas copyright legislation differs widely amongst EU member States and the copyright status of a great number of works remains uncertain,
O. ker so potrebna nujna prizadevanja za razrešitev vprašanja „digitalne črne luknje“, v kateri se nahajajo izjemno dragocena kulturna dela iz 20. in 21. stoletja; ker mora vsaka rešitev ustrezno upoštevati interese vseh udeleženih strani,
O. whereas urgent efforts are needed to solve the issue of a ‘black hole’ with regard to 20th and 21st century content, where works of high cultural value are languishing unused; whereas any solution must take proper account of the interests of all parties involved,
P. ker je treba kot delo, za katerega imetniki pravic niso znani, opredeliti vsako zaščiteno in razširjeno delo, za katerega kljub dokumentiranemu in resnemu iskanju ni mogoče določiti ali najti imetnika(-kov) avtorskih ali sorodnih pravic,
P. whereas any protected or disclosed work for which, despite a documented and serious search being made, one or more copyright holders or holders of related rights cannot be identified or located should be considered an orphan work,
Q. ker potrebujemo več informacij o napredku Fundacije za evropsko digitalno knjižnico pri njenem delu,
Q. whereas there is a need for more information on the progress made in the work being conducted by the European Digital Library Foundation,
R. ker bi morale biti dejavnosti Evropske unije bolj pregledne,
R. whereas there is a need for greater transparency in the European Union’s activities,
Europeana - ključni korak pri ohranjanju in širjenju evropske kulturne dediščine
Europeana - a key step in preserving and disseminating Europe 's cultural heritage
8. ugotavlja, da je doslej Francija dala na voljo 47 % vseh digitaliziranih predmetov na Europeani, zato je treba vse države članice bistveno bolj dejavno spodbujati, naj dajo na voljo prispevke iz svojih nacionalnih knjižnic in kulturnih ustanov, da bodo imeli vsi Evropejci in Evropejke neomejen dostop do svoje kulturne dediščine;
Notes that France alone has provided 47% of Europeana's total number of digitised objects to date, and that it is therefore necessary to be considerably more active in encouraging the Member States to make available contributions from their national libraries and cultural institutions, so that all Europeans have full access to their own cultural heritage;
(iii) Dostop za vsakogar
(iii) Access for everyone
Več in boljše vsebine za Europeano
More and better content for Europeana
(i) Javne vsebine in dostop do njih
(i) Public domain content and access
23. poudarja, da morajo pretekli sporazumi o javno-zasebnih partnerstvih z drugimi knjižnicami veljati tudi za Europeano in da morajo te knjižnice prejeti fizične kopije že digitaliziranega gradiva;
Recalls that Europeana must be able to benefit from agreements signed with other libraries under public-private partnerships and that said libraries must therefore be provided with a physical copy of the files already digitised;
25. poudarja, da se ne sme spremeniti prvotnega namena digitalne knjižnice ter prepustiti širjenja znanja prek interneta zasebnim in tržnim podjetjem, da digitalizacija del ne bi privedla do prisvojitve javne evropske dediščine in nove privatizacije javne domene;
Stresses that the digital library must not depart from its prime objective, namely to ensure that the dissemination of knowledge on the Internet is not left to private commercial firms, in order that the digitisation of works does not equate to a stranglehold on Europe’s public heritage that results in the public domain being privatised;
27. poziva evropske kulturne ustanove, ki se ukvarjajo z digitalizacijo svojih prostih vsebin, naj omogočijo njihovo dostopnost prek Europeane in je ne omejujejo zgolj na ozemlje lastne države.
Calls on those European cultural institutions which take up the digitisation of their public domain works' content to make it available via Europeana and not to restrict availability to the territory of their country;