natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
János Áder, Elena Oana Antonescu, Kriton Arsenis, Pilar Ayuso, Sergio Berlato, Milan Cabrnoch, Martin Callanan, Nessa Childers, Chris Davies, Edite Estrela, Jill Evans, Elisabetta Gardini, Julie Girling, Françoise Grossetête, Cristina Gutiérrez-Cortines, Satu Hassi, Jolanta Emilia Hibner, Christa Klaß, Corinne Lepage, Peter Liese, Linda McAvan, Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė, Antonija Prvanova (Antonyia Parvanova), Andres Perello Rodriguez, Sirpa Pietikäinen, Mario Pirillo, Pavel Poc, Frédérique Ries, Oreste Rossi, Dagmar Roth-Behrendt, Teodoros Skilakakis (Theodoros Skylakakis), Catherine Soullie, Salvatore Tatarella, Anja Weisgerber, Glenis Willmott, Sabine Wils, Marina Yannakoudakis
János Áder, Elena Oana Antonescu, Kriton Arsenis, Pilar Ayuso, Sergio Berlato, Milan Cabrnoch, Martin Callanan, Nessa Childers, Chris Davies, Edite Estrela, Jill Evans, Elisabetta Gardini, Julie Girling, Françoise Grossetête, Cristina Gutiérrez-Cortines, Satu Hassi, Jolanta Emilia Hibner, Christa Klaß, Corinne Lepage, Peter Liese, Linda McAvan, Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė, Antonyia Parvanova, Andres Perello Rodriguez, Sirpa Pietikäinen, Mario Pirillo, Pavel Poc, Frédérique Ries, Oreste Rossi, Dagmar Roth-Behrendt, Theodoros Skylakakis, Catherine Soullie, Salvatore Tatarella, Anja Weisgerber, Glenis Willmott, Sabine Wils, Marina Yannakoudakis
Margrete Auken, Christofer Fjellner, Matthias Groote, Philippe Juvin, Jiří Maštálka, Bill Newton Dunn, Alojz Peterle, Marianne Thyssen, Vladimir Uručev (Vladimir Urutchev), Kathleen Van Brempt, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska
Margrete Auken, Christofer Fjellner, Matthias Groote, Philippe Juvin, Jiří Maštálka, Bill Newton Dunn, Alojz Peterle, Marianne Thyssen, Vladimir Urutchev, Kathleen Van Brempt, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska
2. meni, da je ocena učinka primeren instrument za preverjanje ustreznosti predlogov Komisije, še zlasti skladnosti z načeli subsidiarnosti in sorazmernosti, in za jasnejšo razlago sozakonodajalcem in javnosti o razlogih za izbiro določenega ukrepa;
Believes the impact assessment to be a suitable instrument for verifying the relevance of Commission proposals, and in particular compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, and for explaining more clearly to the co-legislators and the public at large the reasons behind opting for a given measure;
6. meni, da je treba pri ocenah učinka upoštevati učinek na gospodarska partnerstva EU, pa tudi posledice izbire določenega evropskega standarda namesto mednarodnega;
Believes that the impact on EU economic partnerships as well as the implications of choosing a specific European standard instead of an international standard should be taken into consideration in IAs;
10. poziva Komisijo, naj se posvetuje z zainteresiranimi stranmi in predstavniki drugih institucij EU, da bodo ti bolj zgodaj in v večji meri vključeni v proces in da se osnutki preučijo pred dokončnim oblikovanjem predloga, s čimer bi Komisija bolje uporabila ocene učinka in njihovo vsebino pri izbiri politike; nadalje meni, da bi morali biti zagotovljeni povzetki ocen učinkov;
Calls on the Commission to consult stakeholders and representatives of other EU institutions to analyse drafts before the proposal is finalised so that they are involved earlier and more closely in the process, allowing the Commission to better target the impact assessments and their content as far as policy options are concerned; believes further that executive summaries of IAs should be provided;
12. opominja, da je upravno breme, ki ga bo nova zakonodaja pomenila za podjetja in javno upravo, zelo pomemben element ocen učinka, po možnosti pa bi morali biti izmerjeni tudi upravni stroški in stroški uskladitve; poziva, da se za dosego uravnoteženega pristopa nameni pozornost tako zmanjševanju upravnega bremena kot doseganjem ciljev zakonodaje, ter zahteva, da se natančno oceni učinke novih predpisov na industrijo glede na cilje strategije Evropa 2020 in sedanje razprave o novi industrijski politiki za Evropo;
Reiterates that the administrative burden of new legislation to be imposed on business and public administration is a significant element assessed by IAs, and administrative and compliance costs should if possible be quantified; calls for consideration to be given to both administrative burden reduction and achieving the goals of legislation in order to ensure a balanced approach, and urges that the effects of new regulation on industry be thoroughly assessed with regard to the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy and the current discussions on a new industrial policy for Europe;
15. poudarja, da tisti, ki spodbujajo projekte ali imajo posredno ali neposredno korist od njihovega izvajanja, ne smejo izvajati ali potrjevati osnutkov ocen učinkov na okolje, saj je potrebna obvezna neodvisna zunanja ocena;
Emphasises that promoters of projects or direct or indirect beneficiaries of their implementation must not be able to conduct or approve the draft environmental assessment, since a mandatory independent external assessment is necessary;
Jean-Pierre Audy, Ivo Belet, Bendt Bendtsen, Jan Březina, Maria Da Graça Carvalho, Giles Chichester, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Lena Ek, Ioan Enciu, Gaston Franco, Adam Gierek, Norbert Glante, Fiona Hall, Jacky Hénin, Edit Herczog, Romana Jordan Cizelj, Arturs Krišjānis Kariņš, Lena Kolarska-Bobińska, Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz, Marisa Matias, Angelika Niebler, Jaroslav Paška, Ani Podimata (Anni Podimata), Miloslav Ransdorf, Herbert Reul, Teresa Riera Madurell, Jens Rohde, Paul Rübig, Amalia Sartori, Francisco Sosa Wagner, Konrad Szymański, Britta Thomsen, Patrizia Toia, Evžen Tošenovský, Claude Turmes, Niki Cavela (Niki Tzavela), Marita Ulvskog, Vladimir Uručev (Vladimir Urutchev), Adina-Ioana Vălean, Kathleen Van Brempt, Alejo Vidal-Quadras
Jean-Pierre Audy, Ivo Belet, Bendt Bendtsen, Jan Březina, Maria Da Graça Carvalho, Giles Chichester, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Lena Ek, Ioan Enciu, Gaston Franco, Adam Gierek, Norbert Glante, Fiona Hall, Jacky Hénin, Edit Herczog, Romana Jordan Cizelj, Arturs Krišjānis Kariņš, Lena Kolarska-Bobińska, Bogdan Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz, Marisa Matias, Angelika Niebler, Jaroslav Paška, Anni Podimata, Miloslav Ransdorf, Herbert Reul, Teresa Riera Madurell, Jens Rohde, Paul Rübig, Amalia Sartori, Francisco Sosa Wagner, Konrad Szymański, Britta Thomsen, Patrizia Toia, Evžen Tošenovský, Claude Turmes, Niki Tzavela, Marita Ulvskog, Vladimir Urutchev, Adina-Ioana Vălean, Kathleen Van Brempt, Alejo Vidal-Quadras
7. meni, da je ocena učinka „živ“ dokument, ki je del postopka priprave zakonodaje; poudarja, da je treba zagotoviti dovolj prožnosti, ki bo v prihodnje omogočala izvajanje ocen učinka med samim postopkom priprave zakonodaje;
Regards the impact assessment as a ‘living document’ forming part of the lawmaking process; stresses the need to guarantee sufficient flexibility so that further impact assessments can be conducted during the lawmaking process;
10. poziva Komisijo, naj v ocenah učinka sistematično preučuje upravno obremenitev, ki jo prinašajo zakonodajni predlogi, in vedno jasno poudari, katera od preučenih možnosti odpravi največ upravnih obremenitev oziroma povzroči najmanj dodatne birokracije;
Calls on the Commission, in its impact assessments, to look systematically at the administrative burden imposed by proposed legislation, and always to state clearly which of the options assessed eliminates the most administrative burdens or creates fewest new ones;
13. poudarja, da je treba izboljšati delo odbora za oceno učinka s tem, da se zagotovi prisotnost izvedencev Komisije z vseh področij politik, na katere se ocena nanaša, ter tudi z vključitvijo neodvisnih specialistov izven Komisije; ugotavlja, da mora biti delo odbora za oceno učinka še naprej popolnoma pregledno in da morajo biti odbori Evropskega parlamenta v celoti obveščeni;
Emphasises the need to improve the work of the Impact Assessment Board by ensuring that Commission experts from all policy areas affected are represented and also by including independent specialists from outside the Commission; notes that the work of the Impact Assessment Board should continue to be fully transparent and that European Parliament committees should be fully informed;
MNENJE ODBORA ZA PRORAČUN.....................................................................................21
OPINION of the Committee on Budgets .................................................................21
o vmesnem pregledu sedmega okvirnega programa Evropske unije za a raziskave, tehnološki razvoj in predstavitvene dejavnosti
on the mid-term review of the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Union for research, technological development and demonstration activities
– ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o Evropski uniji (PEU) in Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (PDEU), zlasti členov o raziskavah,
– having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular the articles relating to research,
– ob upoštevanju Sklepa št. 1982/2006/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 18. decembra 2006 o sedmem okvirnem programu Evropske skupnosti ( z začetkom veljavnosti Lizbonske pogodbe preimenovane v Evropsko unijo ) za raziskave, tehnološki razvoj in predstavitvene dejavnosti (2007–2013)
– having regard to the decision of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the 7th Framework Programme of the European Community ( or European Union, since the Treaty of Lisbon ) for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013)
– zlasti ob upoštevanju člena 7 zgoraj navedenega sklepa v zvezi s spremljanjem, oceno in pregledom sedmega okvirnega programa,
– having particular regard to Article 7 of the above decision on monitoring, evaluation and review of FP7,
– ob upoštevanju člena 182(2) PDEU v zvezi s prilagoditvijo okvirnega programa glede na spremenjene okoliščine,
– having regard to Article 182(2) TFEU on adaptation of the framework programme as the situation changes,
– ob upoštevanju sporočila Komisije z dne 9. februarja 2011 z naslovom „Sporočilo Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu, Svetu, Evropskemu ekonomsko-socialnemu odboru in Odboru regij – Odziv na poročilo strokovne skupine o vmesni oceni Sedmega okvirnega programa za raziskave, tehnološki razvoj in predstavitvene dejavnosti ter na poročilo strokovne skupine o vmesni oceni Sklada za financiranje na osnovi delitve tveganja“ ( KOM(2011)0052 ),
– having regard to the Commission communication of 9 February 2011 entitled ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Response to the Report of the Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of the 7th Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities and to the Report of the Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of the Risk-Sharing Finance Facility’ ( COM(2011)0052 ),
– ob upoštevanju sklepov 3074. zasedanja Sveta Evropske unije za konkurenčnost (notranji trg, industrija, raziskave in vesolje) z dne 9. marca 2011 o vmesni oceni sedmega okvirnega programa za raziskave, skupaj s skladom za financiranje na osnovi delitve tveganja,
– having regard to the conclusions of the Interim Evaluation of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research Activities (FP7), including the risk-sharing finance facility, by the 3074th EU Council meeting on competitiveness (Internal Market, Industry, Research and Space) of 9 March 2011,
– ob upoštevanju končnega poročila strokovne skupine o vmesni oceni sedmega okvirnega programa z dne 12. novembra 2010,
– having regard to the final report of the Expert Group ‘Interim Evaluation of the 7th Framework Programme’ of 12 November 2010,
– ob upoštevanju svoje resolucije z dne 11. novembra 2010 o poenostavitvi izvajanja raziskovalnih okvirnih programov
– having regard to its resolution of 11 November 2010 on simplifying the implementation of the Research Framework Programmes
Sprejeta besedila, P7_TA(2010)0401 . ,
Texts adopted on that date, P7_TA(2010)0401 . ,
– ob upoštevanju končnega poročila strokovne skupine o oceni programov za raziskave in tehnološki razvoj v okviru šestega okvirnega programa 2002–2006“ iz februarja 2009,
– having regard to the report of the Expert Group ‘Evaluation of the Sixth Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development 2002-2006’ of February 2009,
– ob upoštevanju mnenja Odbora regij o poenostavitvi izvajanja raziskovalnih okvirnih programov, sprejetega na njegovem plenarnem zasedanju 27. in 28. januarja 2011,
– having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions, adopted at its plenary session held on 27 and 28 January 2011, on simplifying the implementation of the Research Framework Programmes,
– ob upoštevanju svoje resolucije z dne 20. maja 2010 o uresničevanju sinergij med sredstvi za raziskave in inovacije iz Uredbe (ES) št. 1080/2006 o Evropskem skladu za regionalni razvoj ter sedmim okvirnim programom za raziskave in razvoj v mestih in regijah ter državah članicah in Uniji
– having regard to its resolution of 20 May 2010 on the implementation of the synergies of research and innovation earmarked Funds in Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 concerning the European Fund of Regional Development and the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Development in cities and regions as well as in the Member States and the Union
Sprejeta besedila, P7_TA(2010)0189 . ,
Texts adopted on that date, P7_TA(2010)0189 . ,
– ob upoštevanju posebnega poročila Evropskega računskega sodišča št. 9/2007 z dne 22. novembra 2007 o ocenjevanju okvirnih programov EU za raziskave in tehnološki razvoj in o tem, ali je mogoče pristop Komisije izboljšati,
– having regard to Special Report No 9/2007 of the European Court of Auditors of 22 November 2007 concerning ‘Evaluating the EU Research and Technological Development (RTD) framework programmes – could the Commission's approach be improved?’,
– ob upoštevanju posebnega poročila Evropskega računskega sodišča št. 8/2009 z naslovom „Mreže odličnosti in integrirani projekti v raziskovalni politiki Skupnosti: ali so dosegli svoje cilje?“,
– having regard to Special Report No 8/2009 of the European Court of Auditors on networks of excellence and integrated projects in Community research policy,
– ob upoštevanju posebnega poročila Evropskega računskega sodišča št. 2/2010 z naslovom „Uspešnost podpornih shem za načrtovalne študije in izgradnjo novih infrastruktur v okviru šestega okvirnega programa za raziskave“,
– having regard to Special Report No 2/2010 of the European Court of Auditors on the effectiveness of the Design Studies and Construction of New Infrastructures support schemes under the Sixth Framework Programme for Research,
– ob upoštevanju mnenja Evropskega ekonomsko-socialnega odbora o sporočilu Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu, Svetu, Evropskemu ekonomsko-socialnemu odboru in Odboru regij o poenostavitvi izvajanja raziskovalnih okvirnih programov z dne 15. septembra 2010,
– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 15 September 2010 on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions ‘Simplifying the implementation of the research framework programmes’,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za industrijo, raziskave in energetiko ter mnenja Odbora za proračun ( A7–0160/2011 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets ( A7-0160/2011 ),
A. ker je sedmi okvirni program Evropske skupnosti za raziskave, tehnološki razvoj in predstavitvene dejavnosti najobsežnejši instrument za podpiranje raziskav na svetovni ravni in glavno orodje raziskovalne politike Evropske unije,
A. whereas the 7th Framework Programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (FP7) is the largest research support instrument in the world and represents the primary tool of European Union research policy,
B. ker je treba omogočiti spremembe, ki izhajajo iz vmesnega pregleda sedmega okvirnega programa, zaradi številnih sprememb, ki so se zgodile po pogajanjih in sprejetju tega programa leta 2006 (nove institucije, novi politični organi, gospodarska kriza), vendar tudi zaradi obsega finančnih sredstev, ki bodo še na voljo do konca okvirnega programa,
B. whereas it is necessary to allow for developments resulting from the mid-term review of FP7 in the light of the numerous changes that have taken place since it was negotiated and adopted in 2006 (new institutions, new political bodies, economic crisis), and also given the scale of the financial sums available between now and when it ends,
C. ker Lizbonska pogodba uvaja evropski raziskovalni prostor kot posebno sredstvo evropske politike,
C. whereas the Treaty of Lisbon introduces achievement of the European research area as a specific medium of European policy,
D. ker so v strategiji Evropa 2020 raziskave in inovacije osrednji element pametne, trajnostne in vključujoče rasti,
D. whereas the Europe 2020 strategy makes research and innovation central to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth,
E. ker je raziskovanje pretvarjanje ekonomske moči v znanje, medtem ko so inovacije obraten proces, kjer se znanje pretvarja v ekonomsko moč,
E. whereas research is the process of converting economic power into knowledge, while innovation is the reverse process of transforming knowledge into economic power,
F. ker morajo EU in države članice najti načine, da se skupaj odzovejo na največje družbene, gospodarske, okoljske, demografske in etične izzive, s katerimi se srečujejo evropski narodi, kot so staranje prebivalstva, zdravje, preskrba s hrano, trajnostni razvoj, veliki okoljski izzivi itd., in ker morajo predlagane rešitve posameznike spodbuditi, da prevzamejo večjo odgovornost za svoja dejanja,
F. whereas the EU and its Member States must give themselves the means to respond jointly to the major societal, economic, environmental, demographic and ethical challenges facing the peoples of Europe, such as demographic ageing, health, food supply, sustainable development, the major environmental challenges etc., and whereas the resulting solutions must motivate individuals to shoulder greater responsibility for their actions,
G. ker so naložbe v raziskave, razvoj in inovacije najboljši možni dolgoročni odgovor na sedanjo gospodarsko in finančno krizo, saj omogočajo EU, da bo kot na znanju temelječa družba postala konkurenčna na svetovni ravni,
G. whereas investment in RDI is the best possible long-term response to the current economic and financial crisis, enabling the EU to become a society with skills that are competitive at world level,
H. ker Evropa konkurira gospodarskim silam, kot so Kitajska, Indija, Brazilija, Avstralija, Združene države Amerike in Rusija, in ker naša sposobnost združevati in usklajevati prizadevanja, zlasti na raziskovalnem področju, med Evropsko unijo in državami članicami v zelo veliki meri določa našo gospodarsko konkurenčnost in torej možnosti za financiranje naših družbenih ambicij, spoštovanje naših zavez v zvezi z dobrim počutjem evropskih državljanov in varstvom okolja,
H. whereas Europe is competing with economic powers such as China, India, Brazil, Australia, United States of America, and Russia, and whereas our capacity to unite and coordinate our efforts, particularly in research, between the European Union and the Member States very largely determines our economic competitiveness, and hence the possibility of financing our social ambitions and meeting our commitments concerning the wellbeing of Europe's citizens and the protection of the environment,
I. ker so stroški raziskav in razvoja v Evropi v primerjavi z drugimi svetovnimi nizki, med drugim zaradi pomanjkanja zasebnih naložb in ker okvirni pogoji niso prijazni inovacijam; ker privlačnost sedmega okvirnega programa za industrijski sektor in uporaba raziskav v korist gospodarstva nista v celoti dokazani; ker pa se poleg potrebe po finančnih sredstvih jasno kaže tudi potreba po boljšem usklajevanju in sofinanciranju med Unijo, državami članicami in regijami, ob polnem upoštevanju posebnosti in etičnih možnosti držav članic,
I. whereas R&D expenditures in Europe is low compared with other global powers, among others due to a lack of private investment and innovation friendly framework conditions; whereas the attractiveness of FP7 for the industrial sector and the use of research for the benefit of the economy are thus not fully demonstrated; whereas beyond the sums involved, there is also a clear need for better coordination and co-financing between the Union, the Member States, and the regions, with full respect for the specificities and the ethical options made by the Member States,
J. ker le pri zelo majhnem deležu javnih naložb v raziskave, razvoj in inovacije poteka evropsko sodelovanje,
J. whereas only a relatively low level of public investment in RDI is the subject of European cooperation,
K. ker so nujno potrebni boljši odnosi med akademskim okoljem, raziskovalno skupnostjo in industrijo, da se omogoči pretvorba rezultatov raziskav v proizvode in storitve, ki bodo zagotavljali gospodarsko rast in koristili vsej družbi,
K. whereas a better relationship between the academic, research and industrial worlds is essential for research results to be better converted into products and services generating economic growth and benefits for the society as a whole,
L. ker bi moral sedmi raziskovalni program temeljiti na enakih splošnih načelih kot evropski raziskovalni prostor,
L. whereas FP7 should be modelled on the same general principles as European Research Area (ERA),
M. ker je bilo od 54,6 milijarde EUR, namenjene temu programu, 25,8 milijarde oziroma povprečno 6,5 milijarde na leto porabljene v prvih štirih letih (2007–2010) in ker je za zadnja tri leta (2011–2013) ostalo 28,8 milijarde oziroma povprečno 9,6 milijarde na leto,
M. whereas, of the EUR 54.6 billion in the programme, 25.8 billion have been committed over the first four years (2007 to 2010), i.e. 6.5 billion a year on average, and 28.8 billion remain to be committed over the last three years (2011 to 2013), i.e. 9.6 billion a year on average,
N. ker je obdobje 2011–2013 občutljivo obdobje, ki zahteva takojšnjo posebno pozornost glede dejavnikov konkurenčnosti in socialne kohezije, katerih ključni element so prav raziskave in inovacije,
N. whereas the years 2011 to 2013 are fragile years, requiring immediate particular attention with regard to competitiveness and social cohesion factors, of which research and innovation are essential components,
O. ker so glavne ovire sedmega okvirnega programa še vedno zapletenost upravnega vodenja, preobsežna birokracija, premajhna preglednost, neučinkovitost in neupravičene zamude, kar so močno odvrača raziskovalce, industrijo ter mala in srednja podjetja, od sodelovanja v tem programu, tako da bi morala biti ena od prednostnih nalog velik premik pri poenostavljanju,
O. whereas complexity of administrative management, considerable red tape, bureaucracy, lack of transparency, inefficiency and unjustified delays remain major handicaps for FP7 and provide important disincentives for researchers, industry and SMEs from participating in the programme and therefore achieving a quantum leap in simplification should be one of the highest priorities,
P. ker je cilj 40-odstotne udeležbe raziskovalk v sedmem okvirnem programu ambiciozen in pravi cilj; ker je trenutni delež raziskovalk v raziskovalnih projektih sedmega okvirnega programa borih 25,5 %,
P. whereas the target of participation of 40 % women researchers in FP7 is ambitious and the right target; whereas the current female participation of researchers in FP7 research projects is a disappointingly 25.5 %,