natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
61. meni, da so revizije ključnega pomena za ponovno oživitev notranjega trga; poziva Komisijo, naj preveri, v kolikšni meri bi lahko lažje zagotavljanje čezmejnih revizijskih storitev lahko pripomoglo k odpravi ovir pri vstopanju na trg in ozkih grl glede zmogljivosti; poziva Komisijo, naj pregleda, kako bi lahko evropski trg za revizijske storitve pripomogel k zmanjšanju zapletenosti postopkov in stroškov za vse udeležence na trgu, zlasti za male in srednje velike revizijske družbe; spodbuja Komisijo, naj sprejme vse pomembne ukrepe za vključitev mednarodnih standardov revidiranja v zakonodajo EU in njihovo uveljavitev, saj bi to prispevalo k vzpostavitvi resnično enakih konkurenčnih pogojev za revizijske družbe; opozarja na priporočila Komisije glede odgovornosti revizorjev; poziva Komisijo, naj v tem okviru predstavi predloge, da bi povečali usklajenost in uvedli evropski potni list za revizorje, pri čemer bi poseben poudarek namenili vsemu, kar zagotavlja neodvisnost revizorjev;
61.Takes the view that auditing is crucial to the process of revitalising the internal market; calls on the Commission to examine to what extent measures to facilitate the cross-border provision of audit services might serve to eliminate barriers to market access and capacity bottlenecks; calls on the Commission to examine to what extent a European market for audit services might serve to reduce procedural complexity and costs for all market participants, in particular small and medium-sized audit firms; urges the Commission to take all appropriate steps to incorporate into EU law and enforce international auditing standards which can help to establish genuinely equal competitive conditions for audit firms; reminds the Commission of its recommendations concerning auditor liability; calls on the Commission, against this background, to come forward with proposals to enhance harmonisation with a view to creating a European passport for auditors, placing particular emphasis on everything that guarantees the auditor's independence;
62. poziva Komisijo, naj oblikuje vseevropski režim odgovornosti za revizorski poklic;
62.Calls on the Commission to develop a pan-European liability regime for the auditing profession;
63. poziva Komisijo, naj poveča prizadevanja za povečanje konvergence;
63.Calls on the Commission to step up its efforts to increase convergence;
Pripravljalka mnenja (*): Kay Swinburne
Rapporteur(*): Kay Swinburne
(*) Postopek s pridruženim odborom - člen 50 poslovnika
(*) Associated committee – Rule 50 of the Rules of Procedure
A. ker visoka koncentracija „štiri velikih“ revizijskih družb na trgu lahko povzroči preveliko kopičenje tveganj, in ker so manjše družbe raznolike, njihovo rast in znanje pa bi bilo treba spodbujati z več priložnostmi za konkuriranje,
A. whereas the high market concentration of the ‘big four’ audit firms may cause an excessive build-up of risk, and whereas smaller firms are diverse and their growth and expertise should be encouraged through increased opportunities to compete,
B. ker bi zlom prevladujoče revizijske družbe resno omajal kredibilnost revizorskega poklica v celoti in bi lahko povzročil veliko negotovost glede kakovosti računovodskih izkazov, opravljenih za javne družbe,
B. whereas the collapse of a dominant audit firm would seriously undermine the credibility of the audit profession as a whole and could create major uncertainty about the quality of financial statements made for listed companies,
C. ker se je po finančni krizi pokazalo, da imajo lahko revizorji pomembno vlogo zlasti pri krepitvi nadzora nad upravljanjem s tveganji v finančnih institucijah,
C. whereas, following the financial crisis, auditors have been identified as being able to play a key role in strengthening the risk management oversight of financial institutions, in particular,
E. ker lahko pride do navzkrižja interesov, kadar revizijske družbe istemu podjetju zagotavljajo različne storitve,
E. whereas conflicts of interests are likely to exist when auditing firms offer different services to the same firm,
F. poudarja pomen revizijskega poročila za delničarje in javnost; priznava načelo „revizija je revizija“ in svari pred velikim tveganjem zaradi uporabe različnih standardov, kar povzroča pravno negotovost; zato je naklonjen razširitvi področja uporabe na vse finančne institucije,
F. highlights the importance of the audit report for shareholders and the public; recognises the principle of ‘an audit is an audit’ and warns of the high risk of the application of different standards leading to legal uncertainty; therefore favours the extension of the scope to all financial institutions,
G. ker so po nastopu krize pretirano prevzemanje tveganja finančnih institucij izrecno povezovali s prožnimi, pomanjkljivimi in neučinkovitimi mehanizmi upravljanja nadzora in tveganja, zlasti v sistemsko pomembnih finančnih institucijah,
G. whereas, in the wake of the crisis, excessive risk-taking on the part of financial institutions has been significantly linked to flexible, scant and ineffective control and risk management mechanisms, particularly in systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs),
2. priporoča, da bi moral revizijski odbor, ki deluje znotraj nadzornega odbora, ne pa izvršilni odbor, odločiti, ali bo dovolil zagotavljanje nerevizijskih storitev zadevnim finančnim družbam, ter se pogajati o ponudbi in podrobnostih glede pooblastila; poziva Komisijo, naj opravi oceno učinka glede izvedljivosti in učinkov omejevanja nerevizijskih storitev glede na prihodek;
Recommends that the audit committee as an entity of the supervisory board, not the executive board, should decide whether to permit the provision of non-audit services to the respective financial company and should negotiate the tender and details of the mandate; calls on the Commission to conduct an impact assessment of the viability and effects of a cap on non-audit services in relation to revenue;
6. meni, da je za ohranitev visokega standarda kakovosti revizije sistem notranje rotacije revizorjev, kakor je opredeljen v Direktivi 2006/43/ES, boljši kot zunanja rotacija;
Confirms that, with regard to maintaining a high standard of audit quality, the internal rotation of auditors, as confirmed in Directive 2006/43/EC, is to be preferred over external rotation;
9. poziva k boljši dvosmerni komunikaciji med revizorji in finančnimi nadzorniki finančnih institucij, zlasti glede posameznih področij, ki vzbujajo skrb, vključno z medsebojnim vplivanjem različnih finančnih produktov; poziva, naj revizorji in evropski nadzorni organi vzpostavijo enako komunikacijo za čezmejne subjekte;
Calls for enhanced, two-way communication between auditors and financial supervisors of financial institutions, especially in relation to specific areas of concern, including the interaction between different financial products; calls for the same communication to be established for cross border entities by auditors and the European Supervisory Authorities;
15. poziva Komisijo, naj preuči uporabo restriktivnih dogovorov bank in drugih finančnih institucij o posojilih in drugih finančnih produktih za podjetja, ki bi lahko omejili izbiro revizorja;
Calls on the Commission to investigate the use of restrictive covenants by banks and other financial institutions on loans and other financial products to companies, which may be limiting auditor choice;
18. poziva Komisijo in države članice, naj z revizijami javnih struktur dajejo zgled in naj se izognejo navzkrižju interesov, do katerega lahko pride zaradi povezave med revizorjem in organi odločanja v javnih strukturah, ki so predmet revizije;
Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that audits of public bodies are exemplary and to prevent any conflicts of interest from arising as a result of links between the auditor and decision-makers within the public body being audited;
23. poziva Komisijo, naj preuči načine, kako doseči večjo preglednost delovanja revizijskih podjetij; ugotavlja, da bi pri tem pomagala uvedba obvezne objave letnih računovodskih izkazov, ki bi jih preverili in potrdili pristojni javni organi.
Calls on the Commission to look at ways of making the operations of audit firms more transparent; notes that the introduction of an obligation to publish annual financial statements verified by the relevant public authorities would help to achieve this.
Burkhard Balz, Sharon Bowles, Udo Bullmann, Nikolaos Huntis (Nikolaos Chountis), George Sabin Cutaş, Derk Jan Eppink, Diogo Feio, Markus Ferber, Elisa Ferreira, Vicky Ford, Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Sven Giegold, Liem Hoang Ngoc, Gunnar Hökmark, Othmar Karas, Wolf Klinz, Rodi Kraca Cagaropulu (Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou), Philippe Lamberts, Werner Langen, Hans-Peter Martin, Íñigo Méndez de Vigo, Ani Podemata (Anni Podimata), Antolín Sánchez Presedo, Olle Schmidt, Edward Scicluna, Peter Simon, Peter Skinner, Theodor Dumitru Stolojan, Kay Swinburne, Marianne Thyssen, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells
Burkhard Balz, Sharon Bowles, Udo Bullmann, Nikolaos Chountis, George Sabin Cutaş, Derk Jan Eppink, Diogo Feio, Markus Ferber, Elisa Ferreira, Vicky Ford, Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Sven Giegold, Liem Hoang Ngoc, Gunnar Hökmark, Othmar Karas, Wolf Klinz, Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou, Philippe Lamberts, Werner Langen, Hans-Peter Martin, Íñigo Méndez de Vigo, Anni Podimata, Antolín Sánchez Presedo, Olle Schmidt, Edward Scicluna, Peter Simon, Peter Skinner, Theodor Dumitru Stolojan, Kay Swinburne, Marianne Thyssen, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells
Raffaele Baldassarre, Luigi Berlinguer, Sebastian Valentin Bodu, Françoise Castex, Christian Engström, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Syed Kamall, Klaus-Heiner Lehne, Antonio Masip Hidalgo, Alajos Mészáros, Bernhard Rapkay, Evelyn Regner, Francesco Enrico Speroni, Dimiter Stojanov (Dimitar Stoyanov), Alexandra Thein, Diana Wallis, Rainer Wieland, Cecilia Wikström, Zbigniew Ziobro, Tadeusz Zwiefka
Raffaele Baldassarre, Luigi Berlinguer, Sebastian Valentin Bodu, Françoise Castex, Christian Engström, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Syed Kamall, Klaus-Heiner Lehne, Antonio Masip Hidalgo, Alajos Mészáros, Bernhard Rapkay, Evelyn Regner, Francesco Enrico Speroni, Dimitar Stoyanov, Alexandra Thein, Diana Wallis, Rainer Wieland, Cecilia Wikström, Zbigniew Ziobro, Tadeusz Zwiefka
o predlogu uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 2006/2004 o sodelovanju med nacionalnimi organi, odgovornimi za izvrševanje zakonodaje o varstvu potrošnikov
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws
Poročevalec: Mitro Repo
Rapporteur: Mitro Repo
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2010)0791 ),
– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council ( COM(2010)0791 ),
– ob upoštevanju členov 294(2) in 114 Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije, na podlagi katerih je Komisija podala predlog Parlamentu ( C7-0012/2011 ),
– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C7‑0012/2011 ),
– ob upoštevanju mnenja Evropskega ekonomsko-socialnega odbora z dne 5. maja 2011
– having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee of 5 May 2011
Še ni objavljeno v Uradnem listu Evropske unije. ,
Not yet published in the Official Journal of the European Union. ,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za notranji trg in varstvo potrošnikov ( A7-0201/2011 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection ( A7-0201/2011 ),
(10a) Treba je oceniti učinkovitost in operativne mehanizme Uredbe (ES) št. 2006/2004 ter natančno preučiti možnost vključitve vseh dodatnih zakonov, ki ščitijo interese potrošnikov, v prilogo, da bi omogočili revizijo te uredbe, ki naj bi izvršilnim organom ponudila boljša sredstva za učinkovito odkrivanje, preiskovanje in doseganje odprave ali prepovedi kršitev, ki škodujejo skupnim interesom potrošnikov v čezmejnih primerih.
(10a) It is necessary to assess the effectiveness and operational mechanisms of Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and thoroughly examine the possible inclusion in its Annex of additional laws that protect consumers' interests, with a view to a possible revision of that Regulation aimed at providing public enforcement authorities with improved means to effectively detect, investigate and bring about the cessation or prohibition of infringements harming the collective interests of consumers in cross-border situations.
V ta namen bi morala Komisija čim prej in najkasneje do konca leta 2014 Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu predložiti poročilo, kateremu se po potrebi priloži zakonodajni predlog.
To that end, the Commission should submit as soon as possible, and in any event by the end of 2014, a report to the European Parliament and the Council, accompanied, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal.
Člen 1 - uvodni del in točka -1 (novo)
Article 1 - introductory part and point -1 (new)
Uredba (ES) št. 2006/2004 se spremeni:
Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 is amended as follows:
-1. vstavi se naslednji člen:
-1. the following Article is inserted:
„Člen 21a
"Article 21a
Komisija do 31. decembra 2014 Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu predloži poročilo, v katerem oceni učinkovitost in operativne mehanizme te uredbe ter natančno preuči možnost vključitve dodatnih zakonov, ki ščitijo interese potrošnikov, v prilogo.
By 31 December 2014, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council which shall assess the effectiveness and operational mechanisms of this Regulation and thoroughly examine the possible inclusion in its Annex of additional laws that protect consumers' interests.
Poročilo temelji na zunanji oceni in obsežnem posvetovanju z vsemi zainteresiranimi stranmi, po potrebi pa ga spremlja zakonodajni predlog.“
The report shall be based on an external evaluation and extended consultation of all stakeholders, and shall be accompanied, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal."
Uredba 2006/2004 o sodelovanju med nacionalnimi organi, odgovornimi za izvrševanje zakonodaje o varstvu potrošnikov
I. Regulation 2006/2004 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws
Evropski parlament in Svet sta uredbo 2006/2004 (uredba o sodelovanju na področju varstva potrošnikov) sprejela 27. oktobra 2004, veljati pa je začela 29. decembra 2006.
Regulation 2006/2004 (the ‘CPC Regulation’) was adopted by the European Parliament and the Council on 27 October 2004 and entered into force on 29 December 2006.
Njen cilj je odpraviti ovire pri čezmejnem sodelovanju med izvršilnimi organi pri odkrivanju, preiskovanju in doseganju prenehanja ali prepovedi kršitev zakonodaje o varstvu interesov potrošnikov znotraj Evropske unije.
The Regulation aims to abolish the barriers to cross-border cooperation between public enforcement authorities to detect, investigate and bring about the cessation or prohibition of intra-EU infringements of the laws which protect consumers' interests.
Poleg tega naj bi zagotovila uspešen in učinkovit pregon nepoštenih čezmejnih trgovcev, ki ovirajo nemoteno delovanje notranjega trga, s tem pa tudi krepitev zaupanja potrošnikov pri sprejemanju čezmejnih ponudb in preprečitev, da bi se prodajalci in dobavitelji izogibali izvrševanju zakonodaje v škodo konkurenčnih prodajalcev in dobaviteljev, ki spoštujejo zakonodajo.
The Regulation is intended to efficiently and effectively tackle cross-border rogue traders which disrupt the smooth functioning of the internal market, and thus increase consumer confidence in taking up cross-border offers, and prevent sellers and suppliers from evading enforcement to the competitive detriment of law-abiding sellers and suppliers.
Uredba svoje cilje uresničuje z vzpostavitvijo vseevropske mreže javnih organov, pristojnih za izvrševanje zakonodaje o varstvu potrošnikov v državah članicah (mreža za sodelovanje na področju varstva potrošnikov), ki je začela delovati decembra 2006.
The Regulation achieves its aims by establishing an EU-wide network of public authorities responsible for enforcing consumer laws in the Member States (the ‘CPC Network’), which started operating in December 2006.
Uredba o sodelovanju na področju varstva potrošnikov delno usklajuje preiskovalna in izvršilna pooblastila organov ter določa mehanizme za izmenjavo ustreznih informacij in/ali sprejem ukrepov za izvrševanje, da bi preprečili kršitve v čezmejnih primerih.
The CPC Regulation partially harmonises the authorities' investigative and enforcement powers and lays down the mechanisms for exchanging relevant information and/or taking enforcement action to stop infringements in cross-border situations.
Razlogi za ta predlog in njegovi cilji
Grounds for and objectives of the current proposal
Mreža, ustanovljena na podlagi uredbe, spremlja in izvršuje zakonodajo, ki varuje interese potrošnikov.
The network established by the Regulation monitors and enforces legislation which protects consumers' interests.
Zakonodaja, ki sodi v področje uporabe mreže za sodelovanje na področju varstva potrošnikov, je navedena v prilogi k uredbi.
The legislation which falls within the scope of the CPC network is listed in the Annex to the Regulation.
Namen predlagane uredbe o spremembi je posodobiti vsebino te priloge, da bi se upošteval nedavni razvoj zakonodaje na področju varstva potrošnikov.
The proposed amending regulation has as its objective to update the contents of the Annex to reflect recent legislative developments in the field of consumer protection.
S posodobitvijo omenjene priloge bo iz nje odstranjena zakonodaja, ki ni pomembna za sodelovanje na področju varstva potrošnikov med nacionalnimi izvršilnimi organi, sklicevanje na staro zakonodajo, ki ne velja več, pa bo posodobljeno s sklicevanjem na novo zakonodajo na področju varstva potrošnikov.
The update of the Annex will consist of the removal from the Annex of legislation which is not relevant for consumer protection cooperation between the national enforcement authorities and the updating of references to old legislation which is no longer in force with references to new legislation in the field of consumer protection .
Prilogo je treba zlasti posodobiti, saj je bila direktiva 87/102/EGS nadomeščena z direktivo 2008/48/ES o potrošniških kreditnih pogodbah, ne da bi bilo izrecno navedeno, da je treba sklicevanje na razveljavljeno direktivo šteti za sklicevanje na novo direktivo.
More importantly, the update of the Annex is necessary as Directive 87/102/EEC has been repealed by Directive 2008/48/EC on credit agreements for consumers, without expressly stating that references to the repealed Directive are to be construed as references to the new Directive.
Zaradi pravne varnosti mora ta uredba začeti veljati čim prej.
For reasons of legal certainty, this Regulation should therefore enter into force as a matter of urgency.
Splošne opombe poročevalca o delovanju uredbe o sodelovanju na področju varstva potrošnikov
Rapporteur's general remarks on the functioning of the CPC Regulation
Poročevalec pozdravlja predlog Komisije, saj je treba zagotoviti, da se v prilogi k uredbi upošteva razvoj zakonodajnega organa EU na področju varstvu potrošnikov.
The Rapporteur welcomes the Commission's proposal as it is necessary to ensure that the Annex to the Regulation reflects the developments of the EU legislative body on consumer protection.
Ob upoštevanju omejenih ciljev tega predloga poročevalec vendarle meni, da je osrednje politično vprašanje to, ali sedanja uredba zagotavlja zadosten okvir za čezmejno izvrševanje pravnega reda o varstvu potrošnikov.
Taking into account the limited objectives of this proposal, the Rapporteur considers, however, that the key political issue to be examined is whether the current Regulation provides a sufficient framework for the cross-border enforcement of the consumer acquis.
Z zadnjim poročilom odbora o izvajanju uredbe o sodelovanju na področju varstva potrošnikov, objavljeno 2. julija 2009
The last report from the Commission on the application of the CPC Regulation published on 2 July 2009
Poročilo o uporabi Uredbe (ES) št. 2006/2004 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 27. oktobra 2004 o sodelovanju med nacionalnimi organi, odgovornimi za izvrševanje zakonodaje o varstvu potrošnikov (uredba o sodelovanju na področju varstva potrošnikov) ( KOM(2009)0336 ). , in srečanjem na visoki ravni z naslovom Uveljavljanje pravic potrošnikov na notranjem trgu (22. septembra 2010 v Bruslju) so se izkazali številni pomisleki glede dosežkov pri čezmejnem izvrševanju pravnega reda o varstvu potrošnikov.
Report on the application of Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws (the Regulation on consumer protection cooperation) ( COM(2009)0336 ) and the High-Level Meeting “Enforcement of the Economic Rights for Consumers in the Internal Market” (Brussels, 22 September 2010) reveal a number of concerns about the achievements in cross-border enforcement of the consumer acquis.
Veliko zadevnih organov ni povezanih s sistemom ali ga ne uporabljajo aktivno, čeprav je to pogoj za učinkovito delovanje mreže za sodelovanje na področju varstva potrošnikov.
A significant number of authorities notified are either not connected or do not actively use the system, although this is a precondition for the effective functioning of the CPC Network.
Za obravnavanje zahtev je potrebno čedalje več časa in organi uporabljajo orodja informacijske tehnologije na tako različne načine, da to utegne negativno vplivati na njihova prizadevanja za sodelovanje.
Requests are taking longer and longer to be closed, whereas authorities are using the IT tool in such different ways that this may be having a negative impact on their cooperation efforts.
Nekatera druga vprašanja so bolj horizontalne narave, na primer vprašanje različnih nacionalnih zakonov o varstvu potrošnikov, pristojnosti in veljavnega prava ter vprašanje v kakšnem obsegu velja obveznost sodelovanja, ki jo uvaja uredba o sodelovanju na področju varstva potrošnikov.
Some other issues are of a more horizontal nature, like the question of diverging national consumer laws, the question of jurisdiction and applicable law and the extent to which the obligation to cooperate introduced by the CPC Regulation applies.
Sporne so tudi prednostne naloge, saj jih izvršilni organi zaenkrat ne določajo skupaj.
Currently there is no common set of priorities among enforcement authorities.
Zelo pomembno in običajno je, da imajo nacionalni javni organi svoj lasten sistem ali prednostne naloge, saj so viri omejeni.
It is crucial and normal that national public authorities have their own system or prioritisation as resources are limited.
Če pa je vsaka zahteva za vzajemno pomoč odvisna od nacionalnih prednostnih nalog in ni skupnega pogleda na to, kako določiti, kaj mora imeti prednost, sistem ne more učinkovito delovati.
But if every request for mutual assistance is subject to national prioritisation, and there is no shared view on how to determine what should be prioritised, the system cannot work efficiently.
Zato bi morala imeti Komisija vlogo pri oblikovanju skupnega pristopa za določanje prednostnih nalog in večletnem načrtovanju.
A role for the Commission in setting up a common approach in priority setting and multi-annual planning should therefore be envisaged.
Poleg tega je treba oblikovati enotno razumevanje pomembnih pojmov in enotno razlago pravil EU o varstvu potrošnikov, na primer opredeliti pojem skupnih interesov potrošnikov.
There is also a need to develop a shared understanding of relevant facts and a common interpretation of EU consumer protection rules, for instance, a definition of “collective consumer interests”.
Pojavljajo se tudi različna mnenja o tem, kako se pravni red o varstvu potrošnikov povezuje z drugimi deli upoštevne zakonodaje EU.
Different views have also emerged as to how the consumer acquis interacts with other pieces of relevant EU legislation.