natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
221. poziva Komisijo, naj redno predloži posebne ukrepe za še večji nadzor EU nad svojimi zunanjimi ukrep v geografskem okviru, v skladu z načeli učinkovitosti, odgovornosti in vidnosti;
221.Invites the Commission regularly to present to it specific measures to further increase EU ownership of its external actions in their geographical contexts, in accordance with the principles of efficiency, accountability and visibility;
222. poziva Komisijo, naj učinkovito in hitro obvešča o uporabi sredstev EU preko mednarodnih skrbniških skladov za Irak; poziva Komisijo, naj posodobi in vsebinsko dopolni informacije ter predlaga sistem, ki bi Parlamentu omogočil jasen in čitljiv vpogled v to, kaj je bilo dejansko financirano iz skladov EU preko mednarodnih skrbniških skladov po svetu;
222.Calls on the Commission to inform it efficiently and rapidly about the use of EU funds via international trust funds for Iraq; invites the Commission to update and give concrete substance to this information and to propose a system which enables Parliament to see in a clear and readable way what exactly has been co-financed by EU funds via international trust funds anywhere in the world;
223. v primerjavi z letom 2005 pozdravlja znatno povečanje stopnje izvajanja pri odobritvah za prevzem obveznosti in pri odobritvah za plačila za leto 2006 za predpristopno strategijo;
223.Welcomes the significant increase in the implementation rate of commitment and payment appropriations for pre-accession strategy in 2006 as compared to 2005;
224. čestita Komisiji za njeno pobudo o izboljšanju poročanja o učinkih posegov razvojne politike na doseganje razvojnih ciljev tisočletja; je prepričan, da bo to zelo pripomoglo k izboljšanju odgovornosti na tem področju; z veseljem pričakuje podrobnosti o oceni pilotne faze, ki je bila uvedena leta 2007;
224.Congratulates the Commission on its initiative to improve reporting of effects of development policy interventions towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals; trusts that this will make a real contribution to improving accountability in this area; looks forward to receiving the details of the evaluation of the pilot phase introduced in 2007;
225. opozarja na merilo, ki ga je določila Komisija, da je treba 20 % sredstev iz instrumenta za razvojno sodelovanje razporediti na osnovno in srednješolsko izobraževanje ter osnovno zdravstvo; z veseljem pričakuje podrobnosti o izvajanju merila v letu 2007;
225.Draws attention to the benchmark, agreed by the Commission, that 20% of funding under the Development Cooperation Instrument should be allocated to basic and secondary education and basic health; looks forward to receiving details of the implementation of the benchmark in 2007;
226. pozdravlja pobudo Komisije za razvoj strukturiranega pristopa za podporo vrhovnih revizijskih institucij v državah, ki prejemajo proračunsko pomoč; vendar ugotavlja, da demokratična odgovornost na ravni partnerskih držav ne more biti dosežena, ne da bi okrepili tudi parlamentarne organe za proračunski nadzor, kot to določa člen 25(1b) Uredbe (ES) št. 1995/2006 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 18. decembra 2006 o vzpostavitvi instrumenta za financiranje razvojnega sodelovanja
226.Welcomes the Commission's initiative to develop a structured approach to support supreme audit institutions in countries receiving budget support; notes however that democratic accountability at the level of partner countries cannot be achieved without also strengthening parliamentary budget control bodies, as required by Article 25(1)b of Regulation (EC) No. 1995/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation
227. ugotavlja, da je bilo v letu 2006 91 % proračunske pomoči podeljene v obliki sektorske proračunske podpore, ki je bolj usmerjena kot splošna proračunska pomoč in zato vodi do nižjega tveganja; dvomi v "dinamično razlago" meril o upravičenosti za proračunsko pomoč, za katero je Računsko sodišče dejalo, da povečuje tveganje; meni, da je treba proračunsko pomoč namenjati le državam, ki že dosegajo najnižje standarde za verodostojno upravljanje javnih financ;
227.Notes that in 2006, 91% of budget support from the Community budget was delivered in the form of sector budget support, which is more targeted than general budget support and therefore leads to lower risks; questions the Commission's "dynamic interpretation" of the eligibility criteria for budget support, which the ECA has said increases risk; believes that budget support should only be undertaken in countries that already meet a minimum standard of credible public finance management;
228. poziva Komisijo, naj izboljša preglednost in dostop do dokumentacije o ukrepih proračunske pomoči, zlasti z uvedbo sporazumov z vladami držav upravičenk, podobnih okvirnemu finančnemu in upravnemu sporazumu, ki določa okvir za upravljanje finančnih prispevkov, ki jih Komisija namenja Združenim narodom;
228.Invites the Commission to improve the transparency and access to documentation relating to budget support actions, particularly by establishing agreements with beneficiary country government, analogous to FAFA, setting out the framework for managing the financial contributions made by the Commission to the UN;
229. čestita Komisiji za zmanjšanje ravni neporavnanih obveznosti, ki izhajajo iz obveznosti EuropeAid pred letom 2001, za 39 % v letu 2006; zahteva redne novice o spremembah ravni običajnih in neobičajnih neporavnanih obveznosti;
229.Congratulates the Commission on reducing the level of reste à liquider (RAL) dating from commitments made by EuropeAid before 2001 by 39% in 2006; requests that it receive regular updates of changes in levels of normal and abnormal RAL;
230. upošteva kritike, ki jih je glede projektov tehnične pomoči Komisije podalo Računsko sodišče v posebnem poročilu št. 6/2007; nadalje ugotavlja, da bo Komisija ta vprašanja obravnavala pri svoji strategiji za dosego ciljev učinkovitosti pomoči EU za tehnično sodelovanje in enote za izvajanje projekta, ki naj bi bila končana do junija 2008; z veseljem pričakuje pravočasno oceno rezultatov izvajanja te strategije;
230.Notes the criticisms of Commission Technical Assistance projects made by the ECA in its Special Report No 6/2007; notes further that the Commission will address these questions in its "Strategy to meet EU aid effectiveness targets on Technical Cooperation and Project Implementation Units", due to be ready by June 2008; looks forward to receiving, in due course, an assessment of the results of the implementation of this strategy;
231. pozdravlja ukrepe, ki jih je Komisija sprejela za spodbujanje usklajevanja med donatorji na področju tehnične pomoči; poudarja pomen usklajenega pristopa, ne le na ravni EU, temveč med vsemi donatorji, ter z veseljem pričakuje podrobnosti o napredku te pobude;
231.Welcomes the measures implemented by the Commission to promote donor coordination in the area of Technical Assistance; stresses the importance of a coordinated approach, not only at EU level but among all donors, and looks forward to receiving details of the progress of this initiative; Paragraph
232. ugotavlja, da je bilo leta 2006 24 delujočih agencij (vključno 2 izvajalski agenciji), v primerjavi s 16 agencijami v letu 2005, ki so tako krile obsežno vrsto funkcij na različnih lokacijah po EU;
232.Notes that in 2006, there were 24 agencies in operation (including 2 executive agencies), compared with 16 in 2005, covering an extensive range of functions in various locations in the EU;
233. ugotavlja, da je tako kot leta 2003, 2004 in 2005 notranji revizor Komisije tudi v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih za leto 2006 izrazil pridržke glede revizij regulativnih agencij: “medtem, ko so bila službi za notranjo revizijo dodeljena mesta za revizijo regulativnih agencij, pa je istočasno povečanje števila agencij na sedaj 23 še vedno nezadostno, da bi službi za notranjo revizijo omogočilo pravilno izpolnjevanje dolžnosti, ki so ji bile dodeljene s členom 185 finančne uredbe.
233.Notes that, as in 2003, 2004, and 2005, the Internal Auditor of the Commission, expressed in its annual activity report for 2006 a reserve above the audits of the regulatory agencies: "While the IAS received posts for the audit of regulatory agencies, the parallel increase in the number of the agencies, now 23, still does not enable the IAS to properly fulfil its obligation assigned by article 185 of the Financial Regulation.
Na koncu leta 2006 je bila opravljena revizija za vse agencije vsaj enkrat v triletnem obdobju, namesto enkrat vsako leto, kot določa finančna uredba“ (točka 3.b);
At the end of 2006, all the agencies were audited at least once over a three-year period instead of once every year as provided for by the Financial Regulation" (point 3.b);
234. poziva k analizi decentralizacije in njenega vpliva na osebje Komisije; poziva Komisijo, naj zaradi decentralizacije predloži časovni razpored za pregled svoje notranje organizacije;
234.Calls for an analysis of decentralisation and its effects on Commission staff; asks the Commission to present a timetable for a review of its internal organisation in light of decentralisation;
235. po treh letih zahteva medsebojni pregled zadevne izvajalske agencije, da se oceni dodana vrednost programa, ki so ga izvajale te agencije, v primerjavi z zadevnim generalnim direktoratom;
235.Requests a peer review after 3 years of the relevant executive agency to asses the added-value of programme implementation through executive agencies in comparison with the relevant Directorate-General;
236. opozarja na ugotovitve Evropskega računskega sodišča v točki 10.29 letnega poročila, da “izplačevanje subvencij, ki jih iz proračuna Skupnosti plača Komisija, ni osnovano na dovolj utemeljenih ocenah finančnih potreb agencij.
236.Notes the finding of the ECA set out at point 10.29 of its Annual Report that "the disbursement of subsidies paid by the Commission from the Community budget is not based on sufficiently justified estimates of the agencies cash requirements.
Zaradi tega in zaradi velikosti prenosov imajo agencije na bančnih računih veliko denarnih sredstev
This, combined with the size of carry-overs, leads them to hold sizeable cash balances
Znesek sredstev v gotovini, ki so ga agencije imele ob koncu leta 2006 (brez Urada za usklajevanje na notranjem trgu, Urada Skupnosti za rastlinske sorte in Prevajalskega centra za organe Evropske unije – ter Evropskega nadzornega organa za GNSS): 213 milijonov EUR v primerjavi z 810 milijoni EUR odobrenih sredstev. .
Amount of cash held by Agencies at the end of 2006 (excluding Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market, Community Plant Variety Office and Translation Centre for the bodies of the European Union – and the European GNSS Supervisory Authority): EUR 213 million to be compared to EUR 810 million appropriations . .
Sodišče priporoča, da je raven subvencij, izplačanih agencijam, v skladu z njihovimi resničnimi finančnimi potrebami“;
The ECA recommends that the level of subsidies paid to the agencies is in line with their real cash requirements";
237. poziva Komisijo, naj podrobneje spremlja sredstva na računih agencij in okrepi dolžnost agencij, da v svojih zahtevkih za plačila predložijo natančno napoved svojih resničnih finančnih potreb, da se izogne nepotrebnim denarnim tokovom in da pripravi boljša predvidevanja;
237.Asks the Commission to follow more closely the cash balances of the agencies and to strengthen the agencies' obligation to submit, in their payment requests, rigorous forecasts of their real cash requirements in order to avoid unnecessary cash movements and to have better future estimations;
238. poziva k subkonsolidaciji računovodskih izkazov agencij;
238.Calls for subconsolidation of the agencies' accounts;
Nepremičninska politika Skupnosti
Community’s buildings policy
239. je zaskrbljen zaradi splošnega strukturnega primanjkljaja za leto 2006, ki je ponovno dosegel znaten znesek v višini 5.000.000 EUR za vzdrževanje in obnovo projektov, ki zadevajo vse stavbe, ki so v lasti Komisije (med drugimi stavba Berlaymont); pozdravlja študijo glede premoženja, ki jo je leta 2007 naročil Urad za infrastrukturo in logistiko v Bruslju (OIB), in ki naj bi ponudila prvo obrazloženo oceno potrebnih sredstev in časovni razpored za izvedbo potrebnih del, da se tako zagotovi najboljše možno upravljanje z naložbami Komisije v nepremičnine;
239.Is concerned about the 2006 global structural deficit which reached again the significant amount of EUR 5 000 000 for maintenance and refurbishment projects concerning all the buildings that are owned by the Commission (among which is the Berlaymont); Welcomes the patrimonial study commissioned by the Office for Infrastructures and Logistics – Brussels (OIB) in 2007, which should provide a first reasoned estimate of the budget required and a timetable for the necessary works to be carried out in order to ensure the best possible management of the Commission's property investments;
240. pričakuje, da bo Komisija pristojni odbor obveščala o rezultatih zgornje študije in o napovedi načrtovanja, s posebnim poudarkom na podrobnostih za stavbo Berlaymont;
240.Expects the Commission to keep its competent committees informed of the results of the above study and of the planning forecast, with special emphasis on details of the Berlaymont building;
241. poziva Komisijo, naj obvešča o svojih nadaljnjih ukrepih po posebnem poročilu Evropskega računskega sodišča št. 2/2007, zlasti glede izboljšanega sodelovanja , vključno z uveljavitvijo skupne nepremičninske politike, ki vključuje oblikovanje instrumenta Skupnosti, ki zajema s tem povezane stavbe ter finančne in zaposlitvene dogovore;
241.Invites the Commission to inform it of its follow-up to the ECA's Special Report No 2/2007, in particular as regards improved cooperation, including the formulation of a common property policy involving the creation of a Community instrument covering buildings and the financial and staffing arrangements relating thereto;
242. poziva Komisijo, naj vključi rezultate analize kadrovskih potreb in rezultate svojega sporočila o politiki namestitve služb Komisije v Bruslju in Luxembourgu ( KOM(2007)0501 ), preuči v njem omenjene prostorske potrebe in do septembra 2008 poroča o rezultatih izvajanja te naloge;
242.Requests the Commission to integrate the results of staff screening and the results of its Communication on policy for the accommodation of commission services in Brussels and Luxembourg ( COM(2007)0501 ), to revise the space need set out therein accordingly and to report on the results of this exercise by September 2008;
243. predlaga, da mora biti v konsolidiranih računovodskih izkazih EU določba o večjih vzdrževalnih delih na stavbah;
243.Suggests that there should be a provision in the EU's consolidated accounts for major building maintenance work;
244. ponavlja stališče, da je treba opraviti študijo o izvedljivosti oblikovanja evropskega organa za nepremičnine, ki bo odgovoren za izgradnjo in vzdrževanje stavb institucij in organov EU;
244.Reiterates the view that a study should be made of the feasibility of establishing a European property authority with responsibility for the construction and maintenance of the buildings of the EU institutions and bodies;
Del I: Posebno poročilo št. 1/2007 o izvajanju vmesnih procesov za strukturne sklade v obdobju 2000 – 2006
Part I: Special Report No 1/2007 concerning the implementation of the mid-term processes, Structural Funds 2000 - 2006
Namen strukturnih skladov je financirati programe trajnostnega socialno-ekonomskega in okoljskega razvoja v državah članicah.
Structural Funds aim at financing sustainable socio-economic and environmental development programmes in the Member States.
Ukrepi in programi morajo zlasti podpirati inovacije, raziskave in razvoj, informacijsko tehnologijo, čisto in učinkovito rabo energije, zaščito okolja, vseživljenjsko izobraževanje in socialno vključenost.
In particular, measures and programmes should support innovation, research and development, information technology, clean and efficient use of energy, protection of environment, life-long learning and social inclusion.
V novem programskem obdobju se je želelo doseči večjo stopnjo koncentracije, večjo avtonomnost upravnih struktur, večjo učinkovitost in strogi proračunski nadzor (zasedanje Evropskega sveta v Lizboni, marec 2000). za obdobje 2000 – 2006 omogočiti 195 milijard EUR (219 milijard EUR pri cenah v letu 2005), ter da bi se dodatnih 16 milijard EUR za obdobje 2004 – 2006 namenilo za približno 200 programov v novih državah članicah
The new programming period tried to achieve a greater degree of concentration, more devolved management structures, greater efficiency and tighter budgetary control (Lisbon European Council meeting - March 2000). for the period 2000-2006, and that an additional EUR 16 billion for the years 2004-2006 should be allocated to around 200 programmes in the new Member States;
V obdobju 2000–2006 je bilo za strukturne ukrepe porabljenih približno 260 milijard EUR.
For the period 2000-2006 approximately EUR 260 billion was spent on structural measures.
Iz tega zneska je bilo 213 milijard EUR namenjenih petnajstim starim državam članicam: programi strukturnih skladov so prejeli 195 milijard EUR, kohezijski sklad pa 18 milijard EUR.
Of this sum EUR 213 billion was earmarked for the old 15 Member States: structural funds programmes received EUR 195 billion and the Cohesion Fund EUR 18 billion.
47 milijard EUR je bilo določenih za nove države članice (pred pristopni skladi in strukturni ukrepi).
EUR 47 billion was set aside for the new Member States (pre-accession funds and structural measures).
Za leta 2004–2006 je bilo 16 milijard EUR namenjenih za približno 200 programov v novih državah članicah. ;
For the years 2004-2006, about EUR 16 billion was allocated to around 200 programmes in the new Member States.
- so bila proračunska sredstva določena z maksimalno možno absorpcijo sredstev;
- budgetary allocations were determined by maximising likely absorption of funding,
- je imelo predhodno vrednotenje le majhen vpliv na postopek načrtovanja;
- ex-ante evaluations had little impact on the programming process;
- so bile v naknadnem vrednotenju odkrite znatne pomanjkljivosti in nadzor Komisije nad njimi;
- significant weaknesses were found in the ex-post evaluations and the Commission's oversight of them;
- oceniti, ali različne oblike pomoči ostajajo ustrezno sredstvo za reševanje težav, s katerimi se sooča regija ali sektor;
- to assess whether the various forms of assistance remain the appropriate means to address the issues confronting the region or sector;
- pregledati, ali so strateške osi, prednostne naloge in cilji še skladni, primerni in še vedno relevantni;
- to review whether the strategic axes, priorities and objectives are coherent, appropriate and still relevant;
- oceniti kolikšen napredek je bil dosežen pri doseganju teh ciljev in v kolikšni meri jih je dejansko možno doseči;
- to appraise how far progress has been made towards the achievement of these objectives and the extent to which they can actually be achieved;
- oceniti količinsko opredelitev ciljev še zlasti pa, v kolikšni meri so olajšali spremljanje in vrednotenje; oceniti, v kolikšni meri so bile horizontalne prednostne naloge - zlasti enake možnosti in okolje - vključene v oblike pomoči;
- to assess the quantification of objectives, specifically the extent to which they have facilitated monitoring and evaluation; to assess the extent to which horizontal priorities - equal opportunities and the environment in particular - have been integrated into the forms of assistance;
- analizirati ustreznost ureditev izvajanja in spremljanja; in predstaviti rezultate v primerjavi z dogovorjenimi kazalniki za rezervo na podlagi doseženih rezultatov;
- to analyse the adequacy of the implementation and monitoring arrangements; and to present the results against the indicators agreed for the performance reserve;
250. pozdravlja ugotovitve iz vrednotenj, iz katerih je razvidno, da so strategije, ki so jih sprejele države članice, še vedno ustrezne in da se je finančna absorpcija očitno izboljšala; vendar pa je bilo nemogoče oceniti učinkovitost ali izmeriti vpliv programov/projektov, saj je bil razpoložljivi niz podatkov pogosto nezadosten;
250.Welcomes that the evaluations proved that the strategies adopted by the Member States were still appropriate and that the financial absorption had clearly improved; however, it was impossible to assess effectiveness or to measure impact of the programmes/projects, since the available set of data were often considered to be insufficient;
251. resno je zaskrbljen nad dejstvom, da je Komisija opisala sisteme spremljanja držav članic kot šibke; posledično je bilo težko odkriti nepravilno izvajanje programov ali projektov, naknadna vrednotenja so bila ovirana, zašita finančnih interesov Skupnosti pa ni bila zagotovljena; samo v letu 2005 so bile na področju strukturnih skladov odkrite nepravilnosti v vrednosti 600 milijonov EUR;
251.Is deeply worried that the Commission described the Member States' monitoring systems as weak; as a consequence any faulty implementation of programmes and projects was difficult to detect, ex-post evaluations were hampered and the protection of the Communities' financial interests was not ensured; irregularities worth EUR 600 million were detected in the area of structural funds in 2005 only;
252. zato vztraja, da se v prihodnje nameni velika prednost oblikovanju dobrih nadzornih sistemov v državah članicah, kar bi bil ukrep za preprečevanje nepravilnosti in morebitnih goljufij;
252.Insists, therefore, that high priority be given in the future to the setting-up of sound monitoring systems in the Member States as a measure to prevent irregularities and possible fraud;
253. poleg tega poudarja pomen analitičnih ocen v operativnih zaključkih in priporočilih;
253.Underlines furthermore the importance of analytical evaluations arriving at operational conclusions and recommendations;
254. obžaluje, da je bilo težko primerjati rezultate vrednotenja, saj države članice niso uporabljale standardnega obrazca za vrednotenje; zato poziva Komisijo, naj oblikuje kazalec ali sistem primerjalne analize, ki bo sčasoma vodil k bolj usklajenim ocenjevalnim poročilom, in tako izboljša primerljivost in posledično analitično globino teh poročil;
254.Regrets that it was difficult to compare the evaluation results because the Member States were not asked to follow a standardised evaluation model; calls therefore on the Commission to draw up an indicator or benchmarking system which will lead in time to more harmonised evaluation reports, thereby improving comparability and, subsequently, the analytical depth of these reports;
255. ugotavlja, da je pravilo n+2 vodilo k večji uporabi sredstev; vendar pa poudarja, da je tako tudi finančna absorpcija postala cilj sama po sebi;
255.Notes that the n+2 rule lead to a greater use of appropriations; points out, however, that thereby financial absorption also became an aim in itself;
257. obžaluje, da zaradi dajanja prednosti absorpciji, horizontalne prednostne naloge – kot okolje in enake možnosti – ter politične prednostne naloge – kot sta lizbonska in göteborška strategija – pogosto niso bile upoštevane;
Regrets that, as a consequence of favouring absorption, horizontal priorities - like environment and equal opportunity - and policy priorities - like the Lisbon or Gothenburg strategies - were often not taken into consideration;
258. obžaluje, da sta bila učinka mrtvih izgub
258.Regrets also that 'deadweight'
Do učinka "mrtvih izgub" pride, ko se dejavnost ali naložba opravlja tudi brez financiranja. in nadomestitve redko upoštevana;
A 'deadweight' effect exists where an activity or investment would have been undertaken in the absence of financing. and substitution effects were often ignored;
259. soglaša s stališčem Evropskega računskega sodišča glede “(…) pripadajočih trenj pri načrtovanju in upravljanju strukturnih skladov (…)“
259.Shares the ECA's view on "(...) tensions inherent in the planning and management of the Structural Funds (...)"
Točka 51. v obdobju 2000 – 2006 kot so:
Point 51. during the period 2000 - 2006, such as: