natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Poročevalec v predlogu spremembe 17 predlaga alternativni postopek za dosledno uporabo ukrepov.
The rapporteur puts forward in Amendment 17 an alternative procedure for the consistent application of remedies.
Postopek temelji na načelu, da samo če se Komisija in organ evropskih regulatorjev za telekomunikacije (ki odloča z navadno večino) sporazumeta, da predlagan ukrep ni ustrezen, lahko Komisija izda utemeljen sklep, v katerem zahteva od zadevnega nacionalnega regulativnega organa, da spremeni osnutek ukrepa.
The procedure is based upon the principle that only if the Commission and BERT (acting by a simple majority) agree that the proposed remedy is not appropriate the Commission could issue a reasoned decision requesting the NRA concerned to amend the draft measure.
Funkcionalna ločitev je zaradi svoje daljnosežne narave predmet posebne obravnave, pri čemer se morata Komisija in organ evropskih regulatorjev za telekomunikacije strinjati, da je to edini učinkoviti ukrep, ki ga lahko izreče zadevni nacionalni regulativni organ.
Functional separation, due to its far-reaching character, is subject to a special treatment whereby the Commission and BERT have to agree that it is the only effective remedy in order for the concerned NRA to be able to impose it.
PREHOD NA NEOMEJENO KONKURENCO
TRANSITION TOWARDS FULL COMPETITION
Ob upoštevanju prehodne narave predhodne pravne ureditve je treba uporabiti postopen pristop pri umiku ureditve le v primeru, da trg postane učinkovito konkurenčen.
While accepting the transitory nature of ex-ante regulation a gradual approach should be followed removing regulation only and if markets become effectively competitive.
V ta namen je morda uvedba kvalificirane revizijske klavzule (zahtevati od Komisije, naj neprestano nadzoruje raven konkurence reguliranih trgov in izvaja redne preglede) ustrezen pristop.
In this regard, the introduction of a qualified revision clause (requesting the Commission to monitor continuously the level of competition of regulated markets and to conduct periodic reviews) might be an adequate approach.
Poleg tega je treba paziti pri oceni posledic novih dostopnih tehnologij (optična omrežja) za konkurenco, pri čemer bi bila morda potrebna prilagojena metodološka in regulativna orodja za zagotovitev, da se konkurenca na teh novih trgih ohrani in se hkrati zagotovijo ustrezne spodbude za razporeditev teh novih omrežij.
In addition, care should be taken on assessing the implications on competition of new access technologies (fibre networks), which could call for adapted methodological and regulatory tools to ensure that competition in these new markets is preserved and that, at the same time, adequate incentives for deploying these new networks are provided.
Komisija naj zato ustrezno upošteva politično razpravo o ureditvi teh novih omrežij za dostop in naj vse predloge na to temo sprejme v popolnem soglasju s to razpravo.
The Commission is therefore urged to take due account of the political debate on the regulation of these new access networks and to adopt any recommendation on this matter in complete accordance with it.
3.1 Podnacionalni trgi
3.1 Sub-national markets
Da bi deregulirali območja, kjer regulacija ni več potrebna, je potreben bolj diferenciran pristop k analizi trga, vključujoč podnacionalne trge.
In order to deregulate where it is no more needed, a more nuanced approach to market analyses, including sub-national markets is needed.
Regulativne obveznosti je mogoče umakniti na območjih, kjer se smatra, da se konkurenca uspešno razvija, in ponovno uvesti ali okrepiti na nekonkurenčnih območjih trgov, ki se smatrajo za konkurenčne na nacionalni ravni.
Regulatory obligations could be lifted in geographic areas where competition is considered to have successfully taken off and, conversely, re-introduced or reinforced in non-competitive areas of markets that are considered competitive at national level.
To lahko zmanjša tveganje navzkrižnega subvencioniranja pomembnejših operaterjev med nekonkurenčnimi in konkurenčnimi regijami.
This could diminish the risk of dominant operators cross-subsidising between non competitive and competitive regions.
Nacionalni regulativni organi bi morali v svojih analizah trga preučiti to možnost.
NRAs should address in their market analysis this possibility.
OMREŽJA NASLEDNJE GENERACIJE
NEXT GENERATION NETWORKS
Način našega ravnanja z dostopom naslednje generacije in spekter sta danes najbolj pomembni politični vprašanji v sektorju telekomunikacij.
How we treat next generation access is, together with spectrum, the two most important policy questions in the telecom sector today.
Upoštevanje teh vprašanj v direktivah zagotavlja celoten pregled sektorja, da bi dajali prednost skladnim naložbam.
Taking them into account in the Directives provides a complete view of the sector, in order to favour coherent investment.
Optična omrežja nudijo veliko večjo zmogljivost kot tehnologije telekomunikacijskega prenosa.
Fibre networks offer much higher capacities than other telecommunications transport technologies.
Ta nova tehnološka realnost poziva k pregledu in prilagoditvi trenutne ureditve elektronskih telekomunikacij s tremi cilji, ki so spodbujanje naložb (starih in novih udeležencev na trgu), zavarovanje konkurence in izbire potrošnikov ter spodbujanje hitre razporeditve po celotnem ozemlju (in ne le na gosto poseljenih območjih).
This new technological reality calls for a review and adaptation of the current electronic communications regulation with the triple objective of promoting investment (both by incumbents and new entrants), securing competition and consumer's choice, and fostering its rapid deployment as far as possible throughout the territory (and not only in densely populated areas).
Medtem ko je priznano, da je neomejena konkurenca infrastrukture (vzporedno z omrežji za optični dostop z visoko zmogljivostjo) pomembna in mora biti zato določena kot primarni cilj, taka razporeditev verjetno ne bi bila izvedljiva ali gospodarna v vseh državah ali gospodarskih območjih znotraj različnih držav članic, kar se že kaže pri trenutni stopnji razporeditve konkurenčnih omrežij.
While it is acknowledged that full infrastructure competition (parallel high capacity fibre access networks) is preferable and thus should be pursued as a primary goal, such deployment would probably not be feasible or economical in all countries or in all geographic areas within the different countries, as the current degree of deployment of competing networks already shows.
Kjer taka razporeditev ni izvedljiva, je potreben pristop odprtega omrežja, ki spodbuja naložbe in po potrebi nalaga nediskriminatoren dostop.
Where not feasible, an open network approach favouring shared investments and, if necessary, mandating non-discriminatory access would be needed.
Kadar souporaba ni izvedljiva, je treba v ureditvi zagotoviti, da si tveganje naložbe ustrezno delijo vsi operaterji, ki dostopajo do omrežja.
When sharing is not feasible regulation should ensure that the investment risk is adequately borne by all operators accessing it.
Operaterji morajo torej imeti na voljo učinkovito orodje za zagotavljanje konkurence, naložb in koristi potrošnikov.
In sum, regulators should have at their disposal an effective toolbox to pursue competition, investment and consumer benefits.
Odvisno od stopnje konkurence na območju, to lahko vključuje obveznost souporabe žičnih vodov znotraj zgradb, zagotavljanje dostopa do pasivne infrastrukture (kot so jaški, drogovi, dostopne poti in notranji žični vodi) in zalednih naprav, spodbujanje skupnih investicij in uporabo povezovanja povpraševanja ali razširitvijo zahtev glede ločevanja na ta nova omrežja.
This could involve, depending on the degree of competition in an area, making it mandatory to share in-building wiring, mandating access to passive infrastructure (such as access to ducts, poles and rights-of-way and inside wiring) and backhaul facilities, promoting shared investments and the use of demand aggregation or extending unbundling requirements to these new networks.
o predlogu Direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o spremembah Direktiv 2002/21/ES o skupnem regulativnem okviru za elektronska komunikacijska omrežja in storitve, 2002/19/ES o dostopu do elektronskih komunikacijskih omrežij in pripadajočih naprav ter o njihovem medomrežnem povezovanju in 2002/20/ES o odobritvi elektronskih komunikacijskih omrežij in storitev
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2002/21/EC on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services, 2002/19/EC on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and services, and 2002/20/EC on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services
Predelava pravnega okvira telekomunikacijskega sektorja mora stremeti k spodbujanju konkurence, zagotavljanju investicij in usklajevanju notranjega trga za elektronske komunikacije, s čimer bo omogočeno nadaljevanje postopka liberalizacije.
The proposed reform of the regulatory framework for the telecommunications sector must be geared towards promoting competition more effectively, safeguarding investment and consolidating the internal market in electronic communications in order to continue the process of liberalisation.
Pri tem je treba upoštevati vprašanja varstva potrošnikov in varnosti mrež, pa tudi kulturne interese.
Consumer protection and network security also have to be taken into account, as do cultural aspects.
Z ozirom na izjemno dinamične trge in hiter razvoj na področju telekomunikacij je treba izbrati prožen pristop, ki bo omogočal spremljanje razvoja v prihodnosti.
Given the fast-changing nature of the markets and advances in telecommunications, a flexible approach capable of responding to future developments is required.
Poleg tega je treba oblikovati v prihodnost usmerjeno perspektivo glede ustreznosti predlaganega zakonodajnega okvira za omrežja naslednje generacije.
A future-oriented approach is also essential to ensure the proposed regulatory framework can cope with the challenge of next generation networks (NGN).
V zvezi s tem vzpostavitev infrastrukture širokopasovnih omrežij naslednje generacije trenutno predstavlja lokacijski in politični izziv, pri katerem so podjetja v veliki meri odvisna od pravne varnosti in varnosti načrtovanja.
The development of broadband NGN network infrastructures raises important policy issues relating to location and competition, and firms require a high level of certainty as regards the planning and legal situation.
Ker imajo nacionalni regulativni organi možnost, da odredijo souporabo infrastrukture, na primer dostop do drogov, vodov in zgradb, so naložbe v optična omrežja mikavnejše in vstop novih udeležencev lažji.
Giving the national regulatory authorities the possibility of imposing facility-sharing and the granting of access to masts, ducts and buildings will encourage investment in glass fibre networks and enable new players to access the market.
Pri sprejemanju odločitev je treba upoštevati načelo sorazmernosti in gospodarnosti ukrepov.
When the relevant decisions are made, care must be taken to ensure that the measures are proportionate and economic.
Širjenje omrežij je mogoče spodbujati tudi z delitvijo tveganja in stroškov.
The development of networks may also be encouraged by risk- and cost-sharing.
Pri opredelitvi trga je treba ugotoviti, ali so zemljepisna območja, ki ležijo pod nacionalno ravnjo, konkurenčna in na podlagi rezultatov izvesti ustrezno deregulacijo.
Furthermore, when market definitions are drawn up it should be ascertained whether geographic areas at subnational level are competitive, so that they can be deregulated accordingly.
V preteklosti je bilo že večkrat ugotovljeno, da obstaja potreba po uvedbi naprednejših usklajevalnih mehanizmov, ki presegajo nacionalno raven.
It has already been stated repeatedly that there is a need for enhanced coordination at supranational level.
Takšni mehanizmi morajo nadgraditi obstoječe in razvite strukture ter omogočiti hitrejšo, učinkovitejšo in doslednejšo uporabo njihovih možnosti.
The requisite mechanisms should, however, be based on existing and developed structures to enable their potential to be exploited more speedily, effectively and rigorously.
V tem oziru je treba vzpostaviti „mrežo nacionalnih regulativnih organov“, ki bo opravljala naloge, ki jih ni bilo mogoče rešiti na nacionalni ravni.
A network of national regulatory authorities should be set up, therefore, to perform tasks which cannot be carried out at national level.
Močna centralizacija na ravni Skupnosti v obliki evropskega organa pa po drugi strani prinaša tveganje, da nacionalne posebnosti ne bodo ustrezno upoštevane.
A strongly centralised system at Community level embodied in a European authority, on the other hand, would be at risk of failing to take specific national circumstances sufficiently into account.
Pri tem ni mogoče opaziti zadostnega političnega ali gospodarskega razloga, ki bi upravičil takšno okrepitev centralnega regulativnega organa v primerjavi z nacionalnimi regulativnimi organi.
There does not appear to be sufficient political or economic justification for strengthening centralised authorities at the expense of the national regulatory authorities.
Očitno je tudi, da postopek komitologije ni primeren za določanje oziroma spreminjanje predpisov, ki se nanašajo na bistvene elemente zakonodaje s področja telekomunikacij.
It should also be pointed out that the comitology procedure is not the appropriate procedure for laying down or amending rules affecting essential components of telecommunications law.
Zato je treba ustrezno omejiti število postopkov komitologije, navedenih v predlogu.
The frequent recourse to comitology procedures prescribed in the proposal should be curtailed accordingly.
Pri analizi in opredelitvi nacionalnih posebnosti trga morajo imeti nacionalni regulatorji možnost, da samostojno sprejmejo s težavo sorazmeren ukrep, s katerim odpravijo težavo s konkurenco.
When analysing and defining national market conditions, the national regulators must be able to decide independently on the relevant proportionate measure to remedy the competition problem in question.
Predlog direktive, po katerem bi imela zadnjo besedo pri odločanju Komisija, ki bi lahko od regulativnih organov zahtevala, naj podjetjem naložijo posebno zadolžitev, bi vpeljal centralno evropsko ureditev.
The draft proposal, by giving the Commission a right of final decision, in other words the possibility of requiring regulatory authorities to place specific obligations on firms, would introduce a centralised European regulatory system.
Pri takšni pravici do posredovanja obstaja nevarnost, da nacionalne posebnosti ne bodo upoštevane v zadostni meri in da se bo postopalo po načelu „one size fits all“.
This power of intervention would create the risk that national circumstances would not be taken sufficiently into account and a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach would be applied.
Glede na nova merila, ki Komisiji dajejo dodatno pravico do veta, je treba izbrati posredujoč pristop, pri čemer mora „mreža nacionalnih regulativnih organov“, sprva v vlogi nadrejenega telesa, odločati o ustreznosti ukrepa, ki ga sprejme nacionalni regulativni organ.
With reference to the new criteria for according the Commission an additional right of veto, the emphasis should be on concertation, with the network of national regulatory authorities acting as a higher authority with the power of deciding whether measures taken by the national regulatory authorities are appropriate.
Za uresničitev zadanih ciljev v zvezi z učinkovitimi in tržno usmerjenimi predpisi glede frekvenc je treba pri podelitvi pravic za uporabo radijskih frekvenc ubrati pristop nevtralnosti tehnologije in storitev.
To achieve the goal of efficient and market-oriented spectrum management, as a general rule the allocation of spectrum use rights should be technology- and service-neutral.
Pri tem je treba upoštevati dejstvo, da je podeljevanje pravic do uporabe frekvenc – z izjemo nekaterih ozko specializiranih vseevropskih storitev – v izključni pristojnosti držav članic in da mora biti pri postavljanju ciljev, ki so v javnem interesu, na primer pluralizmu medijev, možna vezava na določene tehnologije.
Spectrum allocation - with the exception of narrowly defined pan-European services - must, however, fall within the exclusive preserve of the Member States and when public interest objectives (such as media pluralism) are involved, specific technology constraints must be possible.
V skladu s tem mora predlog direktive državam članicam puščati dovolj manevrskega prostora za odstopanja od zahtev glede nevtralnosti tehnologije in storitev, na primer na področju radia.
So the proposal for a regulation must leave Member States sufficient discretion to grant exceptions to the principle of technology and service neutrality in the case of broadcasting services.
Trgovanje s spektrom je ena od možnosti za zagotovitev učinkovite in gospodarne uporabe radijskih frekvenc, pri čemer pa morajo pri sprejemanju odločitev v zvezi s tem sodelovati tudi nacionalni regulativni organi.
Spectrum trading is one possible means of ensuring efficient and economic use of broadcasting frequencies, provided the national regulatory authorities are included in decisions on spectrum trading.
Odločitev glede tega, ali pride na področju radijskih frekvenc v poštev intenzivnejši tržni pristop, zlasti trgovanje s spektrom, in pod kakšnimi pogoji, je v rokah držav članic.
It is a matter for the Member States to decide whether and in what circumstances a more market-oriented approach, such as spectrum trading, can be contemplated in the case of broadcasting frequencies.
V določeni meri je treba upoštevati tudi odločitve mednarodnih organov, denimo Evropske konference poštnih in telekomunikacijskih uprav, Regionalne konference o telekomunikacijah in Svetovne konference o telekomunikacijah, ter tako zagotoviti, da je zakonodaja EU na področju telekomunikacij v skladu z drugimi predpisi za usklajevanje frekvenc.
The decisions of international bodies such as CEPT, RRC and WRC must be taken into account to ensure that EU telecommunications legislation is consistent with other spectrum coordination instruments.
(3a) Elektronske komunikacijske storitve so sektor, za katerega je značilen hitri razvoj, visoka raven tehnoloških inovacij in izjemno dinamičen trg.
(3a) Electronic communications services are a fast-developing sector, characterised by a high level of technological innovation and highly dynamic markets.
Treba je redno pregledovati natančnost predpisov za tovrstne spreminjajoče se trge in tehnologijo, da se na najboljši možni način izkoristijo prednosti konkurence na področju cen, storitev in infrastrukture.
There is a need to scrutinise regularly the accuracy of regulation in such changing markets and technology with the aim of achieving the most from competition regarding prices, services and infrastructure.
Da se zagotovi, da bodo državljani EU še naprej lahko enakopravno sodelovali v globalni informacijski družbi, je treba kot prednostno nalogo pri uporabi te direktive določiti inovacije in razvoj hitrih omrežij naslednje generacije, ki bodo v prihodnosti izpolnjevali zahteve potrošnikov po večji pasovni širini in širši ponudbi storitev.
In order to ensure that EU citizens will continue to be able fully to participate in the global information society, innovation and the roll-out of high-speed next generation networks able to satisfy future customer demands for more bandwidth and services should be a priority in the application of this Directive.
(3b) Regulativni okvir mora biti ustrezen za reševanje novih naložbenih in inovacijskih izzivov ter mora upoštevati dejstvo, da je treba spodbujati naložbe na področju nove infrastrukture in trajnostno konkurenco, da se izbira potrošnikov razširi in ne ogrozi.
(3b) The regulatory framework has to meet the new investment and innovation challenges, recognising the need to encourage both investment, in capacity as well as new infrastructure, and sustainable competition, so that consumer choice is extended and not undermined.
(5a) Komisija je v svojem sporočilu z dne 20. marca 2006 "Premoščanje širokopasovne vrzeli" priznala, da v Evropi obstaja teritorialna vrzel pri dostopu do širokopasovnih storitev visokih hitrosti.
(5a) In its Communication of 20 March 2006 entitled "Bridging the Broadband Gap", the Commission acknowledged that there is a territorial divide in Europe regarding access to high-speed broadband services.
Poleg tega je spodbujanje komercialnih naložb v širitev ozkopasovnih povezav pogosto nezadostno.
Moreover, commercial incentives to invest in broadband deployment in areas with currently low broadband connection often turn out to be insufficient.
Za zagotovitev naložb v širokopasovne storitve in nove tehnologije v manj razvitih regijah mora biti ta direktiva usklajena z drugimi političnimi ukrepi, kot so politika državne pomoči, strukturni skladi ali širši cilji industrijske politike.
In order to ensure investment in broadband services and new technologies in underdeveloped regions, this Directive should be consistent with other policy measures, such as State aid policy, structural funds or wider industrial policy aims.
V okviru veljavne zakonodaje je treba obravnavati tudi zmanjšanje regionalne vrzeli pri dostopu do širokopasovnih storitev in novih tehnologij.
Closing regional gaps on broadband access and new technologies should also be addressed via the current legislation.
Uvodna izjava (22)
Recital 22
Izjeme od tega načela nevtralnosti storitev, za katere je potrebna zagotovitev posebne storitve, da izpolnijo jasno opredeljene cilje splošnega interesa, kot sta varstvo življenja, potreba po spodbujanju socialne, regionalne in teritorialne kohezije ali izogibanje neučinkoviti uporabi spektra, bi morale biti dopuščene, kjer je to nujno in sorazmerno.
It should be possible for exceptions to the principle of service neutrality which require the provision of a specific service to meet clearly defined general interest objectives such as safety of life, the need to promote social, regional and territorial cohesion, or the avoidance of inefficient use of spectrum to be permitted where necessary and proportionate.
Navedeni cilji zajemajo spodbujanje ciljev kulturne in medijske politike, kot so kulturna in jezikovna raznolikost ter pluralnost medijev, kot je to opredeljeno v nacionalni zakonodaji v skladu s pravom Skupnosti.
Those objectives should include the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism as defined in national legislation in conformity with Community law.
Uvodna izjava 5 okvirne direktive navaja, da ločitev zakonske ureditve za področje prenosa od zakonske ureditve za področje vsebin ne posega v upoštevanje povezav med njima, zlasti zato, da se zagotovijo pluralnost medijev, kulturna raznolikost in varstvo potrošnikov.
As recognized in Recital 5 of the Framework Directive, the separation between the regulation of transmission and the regulation of content should not prejudice taking into account the links existing between them, and particularly in order to guarantee media pluralism, cultural diversity and consumer protection.
Zato mora biti še naprej omogočeno državam članicam, da povežejo dodeljevanje individualnih pravic uporabe z obveznostmi, povezanimi z zagotavljanjem določenih storitev ponujanja vsebin.
It must therefore remain possible for Member States to link the granting of individual rights of use with commitments related to the provision of particular content services.
Uvodna izjava (23)
Recital 23
Pri tem lahko države članice upoštevajo kulturno relevantnost radiodifuzije in profesionalnih mikrofonskih sistemov za multimedijsko avdio in video produkcijo ter produkcijo v živo.
In so doing, Member States may take into account the cultural relevance of broadcasting and professional wireless microphone systems for multimedia-based audio, video and live productions.