natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve in mnenj Odbora za ekonomske in monetarne zadeve, Odbora za okolje, javno zdravje in varnost hrane, Odbora za industrijo, raziskave in energetiko in Odbora za notranji trg in varstvo potrošnikov ( A7–0159/2011 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection ( A7-0159/2011 ),
A. ker ocene učinka predstavljajo sistematično vrednotenje pričakovanih posledic zakonodajnih ukrepov,
A. whereas impact assessments present a systematic evaluation of the likely effects of legislative action,
B. ker mora biti uvedba preglednega, jasnega, učinkovitega in visokokakovostnega regulativnega okolja ena od prednostnih nalog politike Evropske unije,
B. whereas establishing a transparent, clear, effective and high-quality regulatory environment should be a priority objective of European Union policy,
C. ker ocene učinka pozitivno prispevajo k splošno kakovostnejši zakonodaji Skupnosti v smislu njene boljše priprave,
C. whereas impact assessments make a positive contribution to the overall enhancement of the quality of EU legislation in the interest of better lawmaking,
D. ker težave pri prenosu in izvajanju veljavnega prava Unije med drugim nastajajo zaradi pomanjkljivo pripravljenih zakonodajnih besedil, za kar so odgovorni vsi evropski zakonodajni organi,
D. whereas the problems arising in the transposition and implementation of current EU law are partly the result of inadequately drafted legislative texts, and whereas all European legislative bodies share the responsibility for this,
E. ker Lizbonska pogodba vsebuje horizontalne socialne in okoljske klavzule (člena 9 in 11 PDEU), ki jih je treba upoštevati pri opredelitvi in izvajanju politik in dejavnosti Unije, zahtevajo pa poglobljeno analizo socialnega in okoljskega učinka vsake predlagane zakonodaje;
E. Whereas the Lisbon Treaty contains horizontal social and environmental clauses (Art. 9 and 11 TFEU) which have to be taken into account in defining and implementing the Union's policies and activities and require an in-depth analysis of the social and environmental impact of any proposed legislation;
F. ker so lahko ob sprejemanju novih zakonov, pa tudi pri poenostavitvi ali prenovitvi veljavnih zakonov in ugotavljanju njihove skladnosti s temeljnimi pravicami, ocene učinka koristne za boljše vrednotenje njihovih socialnih, gospodarskih, okoljskih in zdravstvenih posledic, s čimer prispevajo k manjši birokraciji, zagotavljajo pa tudi skladnost politik EU pri doseganju splošnih ciljev, ki jih je določil Evropski svet,
F. whereas, when adopting new laws and simplifying and recasting existing laws, impact assessments can serve to improve the evaluation of their social, economic, environmental and health effects and their compatibility with fundamental rights, and thus help reduce bureaucracy, as well as ensure the consistency of the EU's policies in reaching the overarching objectives set by the European Council,
G. ker je po mnenju Komisije odbor za oceno učinka neodvisen, čeprav deluje pod vodstvom predsednika Komisije in ga sestavljajo visoki uradniki iz različnih generalnih direktoratov, predseduje pa mu namestnik generalnega sekretarja; ker to vodi do pristranskih informacij in torej do kršitve potrebne nevtralnosti,
G. whereas the Impact Assessment Board (IAB) is considered by the Commission to be independent although it is under the authority of the President of the Commission and is composed of high-level officials from several DGs and chaired by the Deputy Secretary-General; whereas this leads to an information bias and thus to a violation of necessary neutrality,
H. ker se je Evropski parlament večkrat zavzel za uvedbo neodvisnih ocen učinka v Evropski uniji,
H. whereas Parliament has on a number of occasions expressed support for the use of independent impact assessments in the European Union,
I. ker ocene učinka, ki jih izvaja Komisija, niso vedno na enaki kakovostni ravni in pogosto služijo le kot utemeljitev zakonodajnega predloga, ne zagotavljajo pa objektivnega tehtanja dejstev,
I. whereas the impact assessments carried out by the Commission are inconsistent in their quality level and frequently serve rather to justify a legislative proposal than to permit an objective consideration of the facts,
J. ker ocene učinka ne smejo postavljati novih, nepotrebnih birokratskih ovir pri nadaljnjem razvoju ali uveljavljanju evropske zakonodaje in politik,
J. whereas impact assessments may be used to create unnecessary bureaucratic impediments to the further development or entry into force of European legislation and policies,
K. ker so se Parlament, Svet in Komisija v medinstitucionalnem sporazumu z dne 16. decembra 2003, v skupnem medinstitucionalnem pristopu k pripravi ocen učinka iz novembra 2005 in v okvirnem sporazumu med Parlamentom in Komisijo z dne 20. oktobra 2010 dogovorili o pripravi načrta za boljšo pripravo zakonodaje, ta resolucija pa vsebuje konkretne predloge za izboljšanje ocen učinka,
K. whereas Parliament, the Council and the Commission in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 2003, the Interinstitutional Common Approach to Impact Assessments of November 2005, and Parliament and the Commission in the Framework Agreement of 20 October 2010, undertook to set an agenda for better lawmaking, and whereas this resolution contains concrete proposals for improving impact assessments,
L. ker si Komisija v industrijski politiki prizadeva za nov pristop, zaradi česar je treba vse politične predloge, ki znatno vplivajo na gospodarstvo, temeljito analizirati v smislu njihovih posledic za konkurenčnost,
L. whereas the Commission is pursuing a new kind of approach in industrial policy, whereby all political proposals with significant effects on the economy should be analysed in detail as to their impact on competitiveness,
Splošne zahteve za ocene učinka na evropski ravni
General requirements for impact assessments at European level
5. poudarja, da se morajo ocene učinka izvajati v zgodnji fazi razvoja politike; poudarja, da morajo biti popolnoma neodvisne ter da se morajo vedno opirati na utemeljeno in objektivno analizo možnih učinkov;
Stresses that impact assessments need to be carried out in the early stages of policy development; emphasises that they should be completely independent and should always be based on an objective, reasoned analysis of potential effects;
9. meni, da ne bi smelo biti možno, da ocene učinkov projektov ali zakonodaje, ki jih podpira javna uprava ali njena odvisna podjetja, odobri ta uprava;
Takes the view that it should not be possible for impact assessments on projects or legislation sponsored by public administrations or their dependent undertakings to be approved by the administration concerned;
12. poudarja, da so ključni elementi dobre ocene učinka prepoznavanje problema, posvetovanje z deležniki, opredelitev ciljev, ki jih je treba doseči, in oblikovanje možnih strateških ukrepov;
Stresses that the key elements of a good impact assessment are recognition of the problem, consultation of the parties concerned, definition of the objectives to be achieved and the elaboration of strategic policy options;
14. 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;
19. predlaga, da se v ocenah učinka na evropski ravni oceni tudi evropska dodana vrednost v smislu znižanja stroškov, ki bi ga zagotovila evropska rešitev, oziroma dodatnih stroškov v državah članicah, če ne bi bilo rešitve na ravni EU;
Urges that impact assessments at European level should look into the European added-value in terms of what savings will result from a European solution and/or what supplementary costs would arise for the Member States in the absence of a European solution;
23. v smislu načela primerov najboljše prakse poziva k upoštevanju izkušenj drugih držav, v katerih se ocene učinka izvajajo že vrsto let, saj se bodo tako ocene učinka na ravni Evropske unije še izboljšale;
Urges, in accordance with the Best Practice principle, that use be made of experience gained in other countries where impact assessments have already been carried out for several years, in order to further improve impact assessments at EU level;
26. poudarja osnovno odgovornost Komisije za izvajanje visoko kakovostnih ocen učinka njenih predlogov, ko uveljavlja pravico do pobude v skladu s Pogodbo;
Underlines the Commission's primary responsibility for conducting high quality impact assessments of its proposals when exercising its right of initiative in accordance with the Treaty;
Možnosti izboljšav na ravni Evropske komisije
Potential for improvement at Commission level
32. ugotavlja, da bi se morala Komisija pri pripravi ocene učinka posvetovati tudi z državami članicami, saj morajo te direktive pozneje prenesti v nacionalno zakonodajo in nacionalni organi praviloma bolje vedo, kakšen vpliv imajo predpisi v praksi;
Notes that, in carrying out its impact assessments, the Commission should also consult with the Member States, because the latter must later transpose the directives into national law, and national authorities usually know better how legal provisions will work in practice;
34. opozarja, da je treba pred dokončnim sprejetjem ocene učinka njene začasne ugotovitve vedno ponuditi v zunanji pregled; zato se zavzema za to, da je ta pregled dostopen javnosti;
Notes that, before the final adoption of an impact assessment, its preliminary results must always be subjected to an external review; calls for the findings of this review to be publicly accessible;
39. poziva Komisijo, naj v ocenah učinka sistematično preučuje upravno obremenitev, ki jo prinašajo zakonodajni predlogi, in vedno jasno poudari, katera od preučenih možnosti odpravlja 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;
41. predlaga, da se vse dokončane ocene učinka Komisije objavijo v posebnih publikacijah Komisije, tako da se je mogoče nanje enostavno sklicevati in da jih lahko javnost enostavno poišče na določeni spletni strani;
Suggests that all completed impact assessments by the Commission should be published in a special publication series by the Commission so that they can easily be referenced and searched by the public on a dedicated website;
Možnosti izboljšav na ravni Evropskega parlamenta
Potential for improvement at European Parliament level
46. meni, da bi moral biti v zakonodajne resolucije Parlamenta sistematično vključen standarden stavek, ki bi navajal, da se upoštevajo vse ocene učinka, ki jih izvajajo institucije EU na področjih, ki ustrezajo predlagani zakonodaji;
Takes the view that a standard citation should systematically be included by Parliament in its legislative resolutions, by which a reference is made to consideration of all impact assessments conducted by the EU institutions in the areas relevant to the legislation in question;
54. zato poziva Parlament, naj sprejme načrt, po katerem bi njegova knjižnica to storitev nudila poslancem; poudarja, da morajo vsi načrti temeljiti na primerih najboljše prakse parlamentarnih knjižnic, tudi tistih v državah članicah, in da jih je treba izvajati v skladu s strogimi pravili in ob polnem sodelovanju z izvajalci raziskav za odbore;
Calls therefore for Parliament to adopt plans for its library to provide members with this service; stresses that any plans should be based on the best practices of parliamentary libraries, including those of Member States, and should be carried out, according to strict rules and in full cooperation with the research function serving committees;
Oblikovanje neodvisne strukture za pripravo ocen učinka v Evropskem parlamentu in usmeritev za prihodnost
Creation of an autonomous impact assessment structure for the European Parliament, and prospects for the future
Ocene učinka so osrednji instrument zakonodaje, ki ga mora evropski zakonodajalec v prihodnosti intenzivnejše uporabljati.
Impact assessments (IAs) are a key instrument for the legislative process, and one of which European legislators should make greater use in future.
Prednosti ocen učinka so na dlani.
The benefits of IAs are obvious.
Ocene učinka seznanjajo zakonodajalca z možnimi posledicami njegovih ukrepov in mu pomagajo pri odločanju.
They show legislators the possible consequences of their policy options and help them in making a decision.
Tako lahko znatno prispevajo k boljši zakonodaji.
IAs can thus make a significant contribution to better lawmaking.
Vendar pa ocene učinka v nobenem primeru ne nadomeščajo politične razprave ter demokratično legitimiranega postopka odločanja zakonodajalca.
However, they can in no way be a substitute for political debate and the legislator’s democratically legitimated decision-making process.
Služijo le kot strokovna pomoč pri vsebinskem oblikovanju politične odločitve.
They merely permit the technical, substantive preparation of a political decision.
Osnutek poročila je razdeljen na štiri dele.
This report falls into four sections.
Najprej so predstavljene splošne zahteve za ocene učinka na evropski ravni.
First of all the general requirements for IAs at European level are set out.
V drugem delu obravnava poročilo ocene učinka Evropske komisije in nakazuje možnosti izboljšav.
The second section discusses the Commission’s IAs and highlights scope for improvement.
Tretji del je posvečen ocenam učinka, ki jih izvaja Evropski parlament.
The third section is devoted to the IAs carried out by the European Parliament.
Četrti in zadnji del predstavlja zahtevo za neodvisno strukturo za pripravo ocen učinka v Evropskem parlamentu, ki ga morajo uporabljati vsi parlamentarni odbori, da bi tako dodatno izboljšali zakonodajo in ustvarili sinergije.
The fourth and final section calls for an autonomous IA structure within the European Parliament which all of Parliament’s committees should use to further improve lawmaking and create synergies.
Parlament meni, da morajo ocene učinka, ki jih uporabljajo evropske institucije, upoštevati določena načela.
Parliament takes the view that the IAs used by the European institutions should comply with certain principles.
Ocene učinka morajo biti predvsem izdelane popolnoma neodvisno in pregledno.
First of all they should be completely independent and transparent.
Zajemati morajo vse kategorije zakonodajnih predlogov, izvedene pa morajo biti po jasni metodologiji.
They should cover all categories of legislative proposal and employ a clear methodology.
Predstavljeni možni ukrepi morajo upoštevati tudi možnost neukrepanja.
The policy options listed should also include the option of taking no action.
Pri tem je treba ustrezno upoštevati posebne posledice za mala in srednja podjetja.
The specific consequences for small and medium-sized enterprises should be taken into account where appropriate.
Prav tako je treba ocene učinka v razvoju tekočega zakonodajnega postopka redno posodabljati.
Finally, IAs must always be kept up to date with current developments in the legislative process.
Parlament priznava, da je Evropska komisija izboljšala kakovost ocen učinka, zlasti z ustanovitvijo lastnega odbora za oceno učinka.
Parliament acknowledges that the Commission has raised the quality of its IAs, particularly through the foundation of the Commission’s Impact Assessment Board (IAB).
Vendar lastne izkušnje, povratne informacije poslancev Parlamenta in ne nazadnje poročilo Evropskega računskega sodišča kažejo, da bi bilo mogoče ocene učinka Komisije v sedanji obliki dodatno izboljšati.
However, as is shown by experience, by comments from members of Parliament and not least by the report of the European Court of Auditors, the Commission’s IAs in their present form are susceptible of further improvements.
To med drugim pomeni tesnejše vključevanje odborov Evropskega parlamenta in natančno obrazložitev, zakaj Komisija pri posameznih zakonodajnih predlogih deloma ne izvaja ocen učinka.
These include closer involvement of Parliament’s committees and a detailed explanation of why the Commission sometimes refrains from issuing an IA for individual legislative proposals.
Poleg tega se mora Komisija zavezati, da bo izrazila mnenje o ocenah učinka, ki jih naroči Parlament.
The Commission should also undertake to make comments on IAs commissioned by Parliament.
Parlament že lahko izvaja lastne ocene učinka in natančno revidira ocene učinka Komisije.
Parliament already has the power to issue its own IAs and submit Commission IAs to thorough scrutiny.
Vendar praksa kaže, da Parlament le redko izvaja take ukrepe.
In practice, however, this very rarely forms a part of Parliament’s work.
Parlament zato poziva svoje pristojne odbore, naj intenzivneje uporabljajo ocene učinka za izboljšanje kakovosti lastne zakonodaje.
Parliament therefore calls on its relevant committees to make more intensive use of IAs in order to enhance the quality of its own lawmaking.
Pri tem je treba razmisliti o tem, ali bi lahko ocene učinka naročala že ena četrtina članov odbora.
It is also worth considering whether one quarter of a committee’s members ought to be able to order an IA.
Oblikovanje neodvisne strukture za pripravo ocen učinka v Evropskem parlamentu in usmeritev za prihodnost
Creation of an autonomous impact assessment structure for the European Parliament and prospects for the future
Glavna zahteva Parlamenta je oblikovanje neodvisne strukture za pripravo ocen učinka v Parlamentu za dodatno izboljšanje njegove zakonodaje in izrabo sinergij.
Parliament’s key demand is the creation of an autonomous structure for carrying out impact assessments within Parliament, with a view to further enhancing the quality of its lawmaking and creating synergies.
V dolgoročnem smislu je treba razmisliti o možnosti skupnega mehanizma za vse evropske institucije.
In the longer term, consideration should be given to the possibility of a common mechanism for all EU institutions.
A. ker je Parlament že večkrat poudaril, da so neodvisne ocene učinka garancija za kakovost zakonodaje, in je že večkrat pozval, naj se za njih določi zunanji, neodvisni pregled,
A. whereas Parliament has stressed several times that the independence of impact assessments is a guarantee for legislation quality, and has repeatedly asked that they be made subject to external, independent scrutiny,
B. ker je po mnenju Komisije odbor za oceno učinka neodvisen, čeprav deluje pod vodstvom predsednika Komisije in ga sestavljajo visoki uradniki iz različnih generalnih direktoratov, predseduje pa mu namestnik generalnega sekretarja; ker to vodi do pristranskih informacij in torej do kršitve potrebne nevtralnosti,
B. whereas the Impact Assessment Board (IAB) is considered by the Commission to be independent although it is under the authority of the President of the Commission and is composed of high-level officials from several DGs and chaired by the Deputy Secretary-General; whereas this leads to an information bias and thus to a violation of necessary neutrality,
C. ker ocene učinka ne smejo postavljati novih, nepotrebnih birokratskih ovir pri nadaljnjem razvoju ali uveljavljanju evropske zakonodaje in politik,
C. whereas impact assessments may be used to create unnecessary bureaucratic impediments to the further development or entry into force of European legislation and policies,
D. ker ni jasnega pregleda nad skupnimi stroški ocen učinka niti niso stroški zanje prikazani po posameznih generalnih direktoratih,
D. whereas there is no clear overview of the total cost of impact assessments nor any breakdown of their cost by DG,
Burkhard Balz, Udo Bullmann, Pascal Canfin, George Sabin Cutaş, Rachida Dati, Leonardo Domenici, Derk Jan Eppink, Diogo Feio, Markus Ferber, Elisa Ferreira, Vicky Ford, José Manuel García-Margallo y Marfil, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Sven Giegold, Sylvie Goulard, Liem Hoang Ngoc, Gunnar Hökmark, Othmar Karas, Wolf Klinz, Roid Kraca Cagaropulu (Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou), Philippe Lamberts, Werner Langen, Íñigo Méndez de Vigo, Sławomir Witold Nitras, Ivari Padar, Antolín Sánchez Presedo, Edward Scicluna, Peter Simon, Peter Skinner, Theodor Dumitru Stolojan, Kay Swinburne, Marianne Thyssen, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells, Corien Wortmann-Kool
Burkhard Balz, Udo Bullmann, Pascal Canfin, George Sabin Cutaş, Rachida Dati, Leonardo Domenici, Derk Jan Eppink, Diogo Feio, Markus Ferber, Elisa Ferreira, Vicky Ford, José Manuel García-Margallo y Marfil, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Sven Giegold, Sylvie Goulard, Liem Hoang Ngoc, Gunnar Hökmark, Othmar Karas, Wolf Klinz, Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou, Philippe Lamberts, Werner Langen, Íñigo Méndez de Vigo, Sławomir Witold Nitras, Ivari Padar, Antolín Sánchez Presedo, Edward Scicluna, Peter Simon, Peter Skinner, Theodor Dumitru Stolojan, Kay Swinburne, Marianne Thyssen, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells, Corien Wortmann-Kool
1. poziva Komisijo, naj izvede obvezne ocene učinka za vse zakonodajne predloge, da se ugotovi, ali je zakonodaja potrebna in ali prinaša „dodano vrednost EU”;
Calls on the Commission to carry out mandatory impact assessments (IAs) on all legislative proposals, as this is necessary to determine the need for legislation and whether there is 'EU value added';
4. poudarja tudi, da ocene učinka ne smejo povzročati zamud v zakonodajnem postopku, niti se ne smejo instrumentalizirati kot postopkovne ovire v poskusih, da se onemogoči sprejetje neželenih pravnih predpisov;
Stresses furthermore that impact assessments should not cause delays in legislative procedures, nor should they be instrumentalised to serve as procedural obstacles in an attempt to block unwanted legislation;
6. predlaga, da lahko Parlament in Svet za področja posebnega strokovnega znanja zahtevata, naj ocene učinka izvedejo zunanji strokovnjaki;
Proposes that in areas of special expertise the Parliament and Council can request that IAs are externally commissioned from experts in the relevant field;
8. poziva, naj se koncept stroškov in koristi v ocenah učinka zakonodajnih predlogov razširi, tako da bo vključeval posebne kazalce za naravne in kulturne vire, da bi preprečili njihovo morebitno uničenje, saj ti viri zahtevajo ločeno in drugačno ocenjevanje;
Calls for the cost-benefit concept in IAs on legislative proposals to be expanded to include specific indicators on natural and cultural resources so as to prevent their possible destruction, given that these resources require a specific and different assessment;
14. poziva predsednika odbora za ocene učinka, naj na prošnjo pristojnih odborov te obišče oziroma se jim predstavi, kar naj stori vsako leto po objavi letnega poročila odbora za ocene učinka;
Calls on the chair of the IAB to appear before and address the committees concerned, respectively, and upon their request, on an annual basis following the publication of the IAB annual report;
Direktiva Sveta 85/337/EGS z dne 27. junija 1985 o presoji vplivov nekaterih javnih in zasebnih projektov na okolje (kakor je bila spremenjena), UL L 175, 5.7.1985, str.
Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (as amended), OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p.40. ;
17. meni, da mora Komisija aktivno braniti interese EU in vseh njenih držav članic v primerih, kjer lahko projekti tretjih držav vplivajo na Evropsko unijo oziroma na eno ali več njenih držav članic.
Considers that the Commission should play an active role in defending the interests of the EU and of all its Member States in cases where third-country projects may have an impact on the European Union or on one or more of its Member States.