natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
V skladu s trenutnim besedilom člena 2(1) uredbe ICI je " sodelovanje namenjeno povezovanju s partnerji, ki imajo podobne politične, gospodarske in institucionalne strukture in vrednote ter so pomembni dvostranski partnerji in akterji v večstranskih forumih in v politiki svetovnega reda ", pri čemer se doda, da sodelovanje zadeva tudi partnerske države, s katerimi ima Skupnost " strateške interese za spodbujanje povezav ".
Under the current wording of Article 2(1) of the ICI Regulation “ The cooperation ... shall be aimed at engaging with partners which share similar political, economic and institutional structures and values to the Community and which are important bilateral partners and players in multilateral fora and in global governance ”, adding that the cooperation also covers partner countries “with which the Community has a strategic interest in promoting links ”.
Sprememba uredbe predlaga samo formalne (vendar ne bistvene) spremembe k tej določbi.
The amending Regulation proposes only formal (but no substantial) changes to that provision.
Drugič, seznam držav, ki naj se vključijo v razširjeno področje uporabe uredbe ICI, je še daljši, to ni homogena skupina, in vprašati se moramo, ali vse te države (na primer Demokratična ljudska republika Koreja, Mjanmar/Burma in Iran, če naštejemo samo nekatere) resnično " imajo podobne politične, gospodarske in institucionalne strukture in vrednote ."
Secondly, the list of the countries to be included in the enlarged scope of ICI Regulation is much longer, it is not a homogeneous group and we must ask ourselves whether all of those countries (e.g. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Myanmar/Burma and Iran, just to mention a few) really “ share similar political, economic and institutional structures and values to the Community ”.
In če tega nimajo, kakšen je " strateški interes " Skupnosti, ki bi upravičil začetek tesnega sodelovanja z njimi in jih tako vključil v področje uporabe uredbe ICI.
And if they do not, which would be the “ strategic interest ” of the Community that would justify engaging into close cooperation with them and thus including them into the scope of the ICI Regulation.
Istočasno pa vključevanje držav v prilogo ne pomeni samodejno njihovega financiranja, hkrati pa izključitev države s seznama izključuje celo možnost za vsakršno sodelovanje v okviru te uredbe.
At the same time, inclusion of the countries in the Annex does not automatically mean financing to them, whereas exclusion of a country from the list excludes even the possibility for any cooperation under this Regulation.
Zato poročevalec do sedaj ni predlagal izključitve katere koli države iz seznama.
Therefore, your rapporteur has for the time being not proposed exclusion of any particular countries from the list.
Namesto tega poročevalec predlaga, da se pojasni namen financiranja sodelovanja s temi državami, zlasti spodbujanje spoštovanja človekovega dostojanstva, svobode, demokracije, enakosti, pravne države in spoštovanje človekovih pravic, vključno s pravicami pripadnikov manjšin.
Instead, your rapporteur proposes to clarify the intention of financing cooperation with these countries, namely the promotion of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.
Če predpostavimo, da bi se lahko teoretično financiralo vse te države v razvoju, navedene v prilogi II, je zelo pomembno zagotoviti, da ne delamo kompromisov glede temeljnih načel Evropske unije.
Presuming that the financing could be theoretically given to all of those developing countries listed in Annex II, it is very important to ensure that we do not compromise in respect of EU’s fundamental principles.
Zlasti drugi pododstavek člena 181a(1) Pogodbe o ustanovitvi ES (na kateri temelji prvotna uredba ICI) določa, da " politika Skupnosti [v okviru svojih pristojnosti izvaja ukrepe, ki se nanašajo na gospodarsko, finančno in tehnično sodelovanje s tretjimi državami] na tem področju prispeva k doseganju splošnega cilja razvijati in krepiti demokracijo in pravno državo ter cilja spoštovati človekove pravice in temeljne svoboščine. "
Namely, second subparagraph of Article 181a(1) EC (that original ICI Regulation is based on) sets out that “ Community policy in [the] area [of economic, financial and technical cooperation measures with third countries] shall contribute to the general objective of developing and consolidating democracy and the rule of law, and to the objective of respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms ”.
Zato je bil pomen teh načel še dodatno poudarjen s tem, da se jih je dodalo med cilje te uredbe in še bolj približalo besedilo uredbe besedilu PDEU.
Therefore the importance of those principles has been further underlined both by adding them under the objective of this Regulation and by bringing the wording of the Regulation even closer to that of the TFEU.
Vendar pa mora Komisija Parlamentu in Svetu posredovati podrobnejše in bolj strukturirane informacije o načrtovanju in dosežkih, ki bi pomenile preglednejše, učinkovitejše in uspešnejše projekte in programe.
However, the Commission needs to provide the Parliament and the Council with more detailed and structured information about programming and results that should translate into more transparent, effective and efficient projects and programmes.
Dodatno financiranje
Additional financing
Za prilagoditev povečane geografske pokritosti je predvideno znatno povečanje proračunskih sredstev, dodeljenih instrumentu za industrializirane države.
To accommodate the increased geographical coverage, there is a substantive increase foreseen in the budgetary resources committed to ICI.
Skupno financiranje za te dodatne države naj bi znašalo 176 milijonov EUR.
Total financing for those additional countries is foreseen to be EUR 176 million.
V točki 4.1.1 ocene finančnih posledic zakonodajnega predloga Komisije (ki je priložena predlogu spremembe) je bilo rečeno, da se bo " del v višini 108,5 milijona EUR financiral s prerazporeditvami iz ustreznih geografskih sredstev instrumenta za razvojno sodelovanje ".
In point 4.1.1 of Commission’s legislative financial statement (attached to the amending proposal) it has been stated that “ € 108.5 million will be financed through re-allocation from the corresponding DCI geographical envelopes ”.
Komisija in Svet bi morala razumeti ta pristop kot zasnovo Parlamenta za katero koli morebitno prihodnje preoblikovanje svojih instrumentov za zunanje sodelovanje v okviru Lizbonske pogodbe in prihodnje finančne perspektive.
This approach should be understood by Commission and Council as Parliament’s outline for any possible future redesign of its external cooperation instruments under the Treaty of Lisbon and the next financial perspective.
Drugi predlogi sprememb, ki jih je vložil poročevalec, se lahko povzamejo v dve glavni kategoriji: prva vsebuje predloge za izboljšanje sodelovanja Parlamenta pri načrtovanju in spremljanju tega instrumenta; druga je namenjena pojasnitvi in natančnejši opredelitvi predloga ter uporabi omejenih finančnih sredstev za države, ki si prizadevajo za svetovni socialni in okoljski napredek.
Other amendments tabled by your rapporteur can be summarised under two main categories: firstly, to improve Parliament’s involvement in programming and its scrutiny of this instrument; and secondly, to clarify and tighten the proposal and to use the limited funds available to award countries striving for social and environmental global progress.
Poročevalec verjame, da je treba vlogo Parlamenta okrepiti zaradi njegovega sodelovanja pri načrtovanju, ocenjevanju in poročanju.
Your rapporteur believes that the role of the Parliament should be strengthened with regard to its involvement in programming, evaluation and reporting.
Pomembno je, da se Parlament bolj vključi v pripravo in pregled večletnih programov sodelovanja, vključno s pooblastilom za nasprotovanje tem predlogom, če je potrebno, zaradi česar so bili uvedeni "delegirani akti" (člen 290 PDEU) za sprejemanje večletnih programov sodelovanja.
It is important that the Parliament has greater involvement in drawing up and review of the multiannual cooperation programmes, including the power to object these proposals if deemed necessary, due to which reason “delegated acts” (Article 290 TFEU) have been introduced for the adoption of the multi-annual cooperation programmes.
Pomembno je tudi, da je Parlament stalno seznanjen z novostmi in da prejema akcijske programe, podrobna letna poročila in ocene.
It is also important that the Parliament is kept up to date and receives action programmes, detailed annual reports and evaluations.
Številni predlogi sprememb so bili vloženi za pojasnitev vseh namenov uporabe tega finančnega instrumenta.
A number of amendments are introduced to clarify what this financing instrument can be used for.
Zaradi tega je bilo besedilo natančneje opredeljeno in postavljene so bile meje okviru ukrepov, ki se lahko financirajo iz te uredbe.
In this respect the wording has been tightened and some limits set to the framework of actions that can be financed under this regulation.
Po analogiji z Uredbo (ES) št. 1905/2006 bi bilo treba nekatera financiranja izključiti.
By analogy to Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 some financing should be excluded.
Nenazadnje imamo tudi nekaj predlogov sprememb, ki imajo za namen vzpostavitev tesnejše povezave med vprašanji, vključenimi v fazo načrtovanja (in izvajanja), da se tako zagotovi ustrezna revizija.
And last but not least, there are some amendments aimed at creating a closer link between the issues covered in programming (and execution) phase in order to ensure a proper review.
MNENJE Odbora za zunanje zadeve
OPINION of the Committee on Foreign Affairs(*)
o predlogu uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 1934/2006 o oblikovanju instrumenta za financiranje sodelovanja z industrializiranimi državami in ozemlji ter drugimi državami in ozemlji z visokim dohodkom
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1934/2006 establishing a financing instrument for cooperation with industrialised and other high-income countries and territories
Pripravljavka mnenja: Barbara Lochbihler
Rapporteur(*): Barbara Lochbihler
(*) Postopek s pridruženimi odbori - Člen 50 poslovnika
(*) Procedure with associated Committees – Rule 50 of the Rules of Procedure
Odbor za zunanje zadeve je ob koncu šestega zakonodajnega obdobja pozval Evropsko komisijo, da oblikuje dodatni instrument za dejavnosti z državami v razvoju, ki niso zajete v področje uporabe instrumenta za financiranje razvojnega sodelovanja.
Towards the end of the 6th legislature, the Committee on Foreign Affairs had called on the European Commission to create an additional instrument to cover activities with developing countries which do not fall under the scope of the Development Co-operation Instrument (DCI).
Ker je instrument za financiranje razvojnega sodelovanja omejen na dejavnosti, ki imajo značaj uradne razvojne pomoči, je obstajala pravna praznina za dejavnosti z državami v razvoju, ki temeljijo na skupnem interesu, kot so med drugim kulturne in akademske izmenjave, tehnološke izmenjave, politični dialog in podpora medijem.
Since the DCI is limited to activities characterised as Official Development Aid, there was a legal vacuum for activities with developing countries which are based on mutual interest such as cultural and academic exchanges, technology exchanges, political dialogue, media support, among others.
Odbor za zunanje zadeve je v izogib širjenju instrumentov za zunanje odnose predlagal, da se obstoječi instrument za financiranje sodelovanja z industrializiranimi državami (ICI) (Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 1934/2006) spremeni v instrument za sodelovanje s tretjimi državami na področju dejavnosti, ki niso povezane z uradno razvojno pomočjo.
In order to avoid having a proliferation of external relations instruments, the Committee on Foreign Affairs had proposed that the existing Industrialised Countries Instrument (ICI) (Council Regulation (EC) No 1934/2006 be transformed into an “Instrument for Co-operation with third countries on non-ODA activities”.
Komisija je oblikovala predlog za spremembo uredbe (ICI+) (KOM(2009)197 končno), ki je bil iz zgodovinskih razlogov predložen Odboru za mednarodno trgovino, kot pristojnemu odboru, saj je bil to pristojni odbor že pri prvotnem dokumentu ICI.
The Commission came up with a proposal for an amending regulation (the “ICI+”) (COM(2009)197 final), which was referred to the Committee on International Trade as the lead committee for historical reasons – the Committee had been the lead committee on the original ICI dossier.
Odbor za zunanje zadeve je v skladu s členom 50 poslovnika Parlamenta zahteval status pridruženega odbora, da nov instrument ne bi bil samo sredstvo za nadomeščanje izpuščenih stvari v prvotnem instrumentu, ampak da bi tudi –in to v veliki meri – postal instrument zunanje politike za odnose med EU in tretjimi državami v Aziji, Latinski Ameriki in na Bližnjem vzhodu.
The Committee on Foreign Affairs requested associated committee status, pursuant to Rule 50 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, on the basis that the new instrument would not merely constitute a way of rectifying an omission in the original instrument but also – and significantly – that it would now become a foreign policy instrument for relations between the EU and third countries in Asia, Latin America and the Middle East.
Komisija je v svojem novem predlogu razširila geografsko področje uporabe instrumenta ICI od prvotnih 17 držav z visokim dohodkom na dodatnih 46 držav, ki so zajete v uredbo o instrumentu za financiranje razvojnega sodelovanja, in predlagala približno podvojitev referenčnega zneska za takšno sodelovanje za obdobje 2010–2013 s 172 milijonov EUR na 348 milijonov EUR.
In its new proposal the Commission extends the geographical scope of the original 17 high income countries of the ICI to another 46 countries covered by the DCI Regulation and proposes to roughly double the reference amount for such co-operation from EUR 172 million to EUR 348 million for the 2010-2013 period.
Lizbonska pogodba je začela veljati 1. decembra 2009 in zato je bilo treba pravno podlago, ki zadeva novi instrument, spremeniti.
On 1 December 2009 the Lisbon Treaty came into force and the legal basis applicable to the new instrument had to be amended.
V skladu z določbami nove pogodbe, se je nekdanji člen 181a (sedaj člen 212 ) spremenil in zajema samo dejavnosti, ki se nanašajo na industrializirane države .
With the provisions of the new Treaty, the former Article 181a (now Article 212 ) changes to only cover activities in relation to industrialised countries .
Ker bosta zaradi preoblikovanja ICI več kot dve tretjini partnerskih držav postale države v razvoju, sta bili dodani dve pravni podlagi: razvojno sodelovanje (člen 208/9 ) in trgovinska politika (člen 206/7 ).
Since with the reshaping of the ICI, over two thirds of the partner countries will be developing countries, two other legal bases were added: development cooperation (Article 208/9) and commercial policy (Article 206/7 ).
Dejansko pa nobena od treh pravnih podlag popolnoma ne ustreza vrsti dejavnosti, ki naj bi bile zajete v ta nov instrument, saj se z začetkom veljave Lizbonske pogodbe ni spremenil samo pomen člena 212, ampak je bil natančno revidiran tudi člen 208/9.
In fact neither of the three legal bases fully corresponds to the type of activities which are supposed to be covered by this new instrument because with the coming into force of the Lisbon Treaty not only did the import of Article 212 change, but Article 208/9 was also overhauled.
Najpomembnejši cilj razvojnega sodelovanja je sedaj zmanjševanje revščine.
Poverty alleviation now becomes the “primary objective” of development cooperation.
Zmanjševanje revščine je v okviru uradne razvojne pomoči jasno opredeljeno kot glavni cilj velikega instrumenta za financiranje razvojnega sodelovanja, medtem ko naj bi mali, preoblikovani ICI, zajemal dejavnosti, ki niso povezane z uradno razvojno pomočjo, so pa skupnega interesa za Evropo in države partnerice.
While “poverty alleviation” in the framework of “Official Development Aid” is clearly the main goal of the “big” DCI, the “small”, reshaped ICI is supposed to cover non-ODA activities of common interest between Europe and the partner countries.
Duh člena 208/9 bo upoštevan samo, kadar bosta instrument za financiranje razvojnega sodelovanja in (preoblikovani) ICI obravnavana kot dva dela celote.
The spirit of Article 208/9 is therefore only fulfilled when the DCI Instrument and the (re-shaped) ICI are viewed as two parts of a whole.
Ob pomanjkanju boljše rešitve, so se pravne službe treh institucij dogovorile, da bodo sprejele trojno pravno podlago in pripravljavka mnenja predlaga, da se upošteva predlog Komisije.
In the absence of any better solution, the legal services of all three institutions agreed to accept the triple legal base and the rapporteur suggests following the Commission’s proposal.
V okviru evropskega instrumenta za demokracijo in človekove pravice, instrumenta za financiranje razvojnega sodelovanja in instrumenta za stabilnost sta odbora AFET in DEVE že sprejela stališče, da je treba strateške dokumente in/ali večletne okvirne programe obravnavati kot delegirane akte v skladu s členom 290.
In the framework of the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR), the Development Co-operation Instrument (DCI) and the Instrument for Stability (IfS) the AFET and DEVE Committees have already taken the view that strategy papers and/or multiannual indicative programmes should be considered “delegated acts” under article 290.
Odbor INTA pa naj bi imel isti pristop glede preoblikovanega ICI.
The INTA Committee is expected to adopt the same line on the reshaped ICI.
To stališče podpira pravna služba Parlamenta in zavračata – kot pričakovano – pravni službi ostalih dveh institucij.
This position is shared by Parliament’s legal service and rejected – not surprisingly – by the legal services of the other two institutions.
V tem primeru bi imel Parlament pristojnost, da nasprotuje predlaganim osnutkom večletnih programov sodelovanja (oziroma njihovim spremembam), če se bi se mu to zdelo potrebno.
It would give Parliament the power to object to proposed draft multi-annual cooperation programmes (or their reviews) if deemed necessary.
Za preoblikovani ICI bi morali združiti moči z drugimi instrumenti in zahtevati status delegiranih aktov za večletne programe (zlasti ob upoštevanju dejstva, da je sama uredba ICI zelo splošna).
For the re-shaped ICI we should join forces with the other instruments and demand “delegated act” status for the multi-annual programmes (especially considering that the ICI Regulation itself is very general).
Skupna tristranska srečanja bodo organizirana z namenom, da se doseže sporazum s Komisijo in Svetom glede tega posebnega horizontalnega vprašanja, kar pa bi okrepilo naše stališče in sposobnost pogajanja.
Joint trilogues will be organised with the aim of finding an agreement with the Commission and the Council regarding this specific horizontal issue, and this should strengthen our position and ability to negotiate.
Finančna sredstva
Financial envelope
Poleg 172 milijonov EUR, ki so predvideni za prvotni instrument ICI, je Komisija predlagala dodatnih 176 milijonov EUR za nove države (priloga II).
In addition to the EUR 172 million foreseen for the original ICI instrument, the Commission proposes adding EUR 176 million for the new countries (Annex II).
Na žalost ti zneski sploh ne ustrezajo deležu držav, zajetih v prihodnji uredbi, saj države v razvoju v Prilogi II predstavljajo dve tretjini vseh držav, delež držav z visokim dohodkom pa se je temu ustrezno zmanjšal na eno tretjino celote.
Regrettably, these envelopes do not at all correspond to the proportions of the countries covered in the future regulation, with developing countries in Annex II representing two thirds of all countries and the high income countries correspondingly reduced to one third of the whole.
Verjamemo, da se bo to vprašanje obravnavalo med revizijo uredbe.
We trust this will be addressed when the regulation is up for review.
Komisija predlaga prenos 108,5 milijona EUR od skupaj 176 milijonov EUR iz instrumenta za financiranje razvojnega sodelovanja, ki so namenjeni državam iz priloge II.
The Commission proposes to transfer EUR 108.5 million of the EUR 176 million intended for Annex II countries from the DCI.
Pripravljavka mnenja se strinja s stališčem poročevalca odbora INTA in odbora DEVE, da ni treba prenesti sredstev iz instrumenta za financiranje razvojnega sodelovanja.
The rapporteur shares the position of the INTA rapporteur and of DEVE that there should be no transfer of funding from the DCI.
Zaradi spremenjenega obsega politike revidiranega instrumenta ICI je treba spremeniti tudi naslov.
In view of the changed policy outreach of the revised ICI instrument, the title has to be changed.
V predlogi spremembe 4 poročevalec predlaga, da bi se nov instrument imenoval "instrument za financiranje sodelovanja z državami Bližnjega vzhoda, Azije, obeh Amerik in Južne Afrike."
In Amendment 4 the rapporteur proposes calling the new instrument “a financing instrument for co-operation with countries in the Middle East, Asia, the Americas and South Africa”.
Skrajšana različica bi se tako glasila: MAAS.
The abbreviated version could then read: MAAS.
b) Razširitev področja uporabe
b) Extension of scope
Narava instrumenta se spremeni iz orodja, ki je podpiralo zlasti boljše gospodarske in trgovinske vezi z nekaterimi državami z visokim dohodkom, v instrument zunanje politike, pri katerem je večina partnerjev pri sodelovanju države v razvoju.
The character of the instrument changes from a tool to essentially support better economic and commercial ties with certain high income countries to a foreign policy instrument, where the majority of cooperation partners are developing countries.
Razmerje je ena tretjina držav z visokim dohodkom in industrializiranih držav (priloga 1 predloga uredbe
The ratio is one third high income and industrialised countries (Annex I in the proposed Regulation
Avstralija, Bahrajn, Brunej, Kanada, Kitajski Tajpeh (kljub temu, da s Kitajskim Tajpehom ni diplomatskih ali političnih odnosov, potekajo intezivni stiki, s katerimi je treba nadaljevati na področju gospodarstva, trgovine, znanosti in tehnologije, standardov in norm in na mnogih drugih področjih) , Hongkong, Japonska Republika Koreja, Kuvajt, Makao, Nova Zelandija, Oman, Katar, Savdska Arabija, Singapur, Združeni arabski emirati in Združene države proti dvema tretjinama držav v razvoju (priloga II predloga uredbe
Australia, Bahrain, Brunei, Canada, Chinese Taipei (although there are no diplomatic or political relations with Chinese Taipei, intensive contacts do take place and should be continued in the areas of economy, trade, science and technology, standards and norms and on a number of other subjects) , Hong-Kong, Japan, Republic of Korea, Kuwait, Macao, New Zealand, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, United Arab Emirates, United States ) to two thirds developing countries (Annex II in the proposed Regulation
Argentina, Bolivija, Brazilija, Čile, Kolumbija, Kostarika, Kuba, Ekvador, Salvador, Gvatemala, Honduras, Mehika, Nikaragva, Panama, Paragvaj, Peru, Urugvaj, Venezuela, Afganistan, Bangladeš, Butan, Kambodža, Kitajska, Indija, Indonezija, Demokratična ljudska republika Koreja, Laos, Malezija, Maldivi, Mongolija, Mjanmar/Burma, Nepal, Pakistan, Filipini, Šrilanka, Tajska, Vietnam, Kazahstan, Kirgiška republika, Tadžikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Iran, Irak, Jemen, Južna Afrika. .
Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Laos, Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar/Burma, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Viet Nam, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, South Africa ).