natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
opozarja, da so dodatne in specifične informacije prostovoljne ter da celotna označba ne sme biti prenatrpana; meni, da bi morala biti zlasti oznaka kakovosti EU v prvi vrsti jasno prepoznavna;
Points out that supplementary and specific information is voluntary and that the total labelling content must not be overloaded; takes the view that the EU quality label should remain clearly recognisable as a priority;
meni, da je treba preučiti tudi druge načine obveščanja, na primer prek interneta, črtnih kod ali ob nakupu;
Believes that alternative methods of providing information, e.g. via the Internet or barcodes or on the receipt, should also be considered;
poziva Komisijo, naj opravi natančno tehnično in ekonomsko študijo, da bi zagotovila, da nova zakonodaja ne bi nalagala prevelikih stroškov predelovalni živilski industriji, zlasti malim in srednjim proizvajalcem; ta študija mora obravnavati izvedljivost obveznega označevanja območja kmetovanja za predelana živila, ki vsebujejo „pomembne sestavine“ (to je sestavina živila, ki predstavlja več kot 50 % suhe snovi tega živila) ali „opredeljujoče sestavine živila“ (to pomeni, da potrošniki običajno povezujejo sestavino živila z njegovim imenom), kot je opredeljeno v drugem členu uredbe o zagotavljanju informacij o živilih potrošnikom;
Calls on the Commission to carry out a thorough technical and economic study to ensure that the new legislation does not impose excessive costs on the food processing industry, in particular on small and medium-sized producers; such a study should cover the feasibility of introducing compulsory ‘place of farming’ labelling for processed products which contain ‘significant ingredients’ (meaning an ingredient of a food product that represents more than 50% of the dry weight of that food product) or ‘characterising ingredients’ (meaning the ingredient of a food usually associated with the name of the food by consumers), as defined in the proposed EU regulation on the provision of food information to consumers, Article 2;
zahteva, naj poenostavitev standardov in krepitev verodostojnosti logotipa kakovosti EU dopolnita že obstoječe certifikate ter oznake lokalnega, regionalnega in nacionalnega porekla v državah članicah;
Requests that the simplification of standards and the enhancement of the credibility of the EU quality logo should complement already-existing certificates or designations of local, regional or national origin in the Member States;
poziva Komisijo, naj bo dosledna v svojih predlogih za politiko kakovosti kmetijskih proizvodov pri označevanju države porekla , kot se predlaga v uredbi o zagotavljanju informacij o živilih potrošnikom; meni, da bi bilo treba politiko kakovosti kmetijskih proizvodov izvajati na način, ki upošteva stroške nove politike ter posebnosti posameznih sektorjev, kot je sektor predelanih kmetijskih proizvodov;
Calls on the Commission to maintain consistency in its proposals on agricultural product quality policy, in terms of the approach to ‘country of origin’ labelling and the proposed regulation on the provision of food information to consumers; considers that agricultural product quality policy should be implemented in a manner that takes into account the costs of new policy, as well as the specificities of particular sectors such as the processed agricultural goods sector;
Geografske označbe in tradicionalne posebnosti
Geographical indications and traditional specialities
meni, da je sistem zaščitene označbe porekla in zaščitene geografske označbe eden od instrumentov skupne kmetijske politike, ki so namenjeni razvoju podeželja, varstvu regionalne kulturne dediščine in pospeševanju diverzifikacije zaposlovanja na podeželju;
Considers the protected designations of origin and geographical indications system to be one of the CAP instruments intended to support the development of rural areas, protect the cultural heritage of regions and foster the diversification of employment in rural areas;
meni, da imajo geografske označbe velik pomen za evropsko kmetijstvo; meni, da bi bilo treba tri sisteme registriranja geografskih označb (za vina, žgane pijače ter kmetijske in živilske proizvode) ohraniti takšne, kakršni so sedaj;
Considers that geographical indications have considerable importance for European agriculture; is of the opinion that the three systems of registration of geographical indications (for wines, spirits and for agricultural products and foodstuffs) should be maintained as they stand at present;
prav tako meni, da bi bilo treba v prihodnosti ohraniti oba instrumenta, ki sta sedaj v uporabi (zaščitena označba porekla in zaščitena geografska označba), saj sta široko priznana in zelo uspešna; meni, da je potrošnikom treba jasneje podati razliko med zaščiteno označbo porekla in zaščiteno geografsko označbo ter da je to mogoče doseči s skupnimi dejavnostmi obveščanja in promocije, v okviru mednarodnega trga in tretjih držav pa mora biti vključena finančna podpora Skupnosti, med drugim s povečanjem deleža sofinanciranja Skupnosti;
Further considers that the two instruments in place – the protected designation of origin (PDO) and the protected geographical indication (PGI) – should also be kept in the future, given their high degree of recognition and success; holds that a clearer distinction, for consumers, needs to be made between PDO and PGI and that this can be achieved through an overall information and promotion effort, involving Community financial support in the context of both the international market and third countries, inter alia by increasing the percentage of Community cofinancing;
meni, da je treba obstoječa pravila Unije o geografski označbi dopolniti tako, da bi lahko popolnoma priznali in okrepili vlogo organizacij, ki so jih države članice imenovale ali potrdile za upravljanje, varstvo in/ali spodbujanje pravice intelektualne lastnine, podeljene z registracijo geografske označbe;
Considers that the current EU rules on GIs should be supplemented to ensure full recognition and enhancement of the role played by organisations designated or recognised by the Member States as responsible for managing, protecting and/or promoting intellectual property rights conferred by registration as a GI;
meni, da so izkušnje proizvajalcev pokazale, da upravljanje kakovosti proizvodov z zaščiteno označbo porekla in zaščiteno geografsko označbo ter zaščita pred zlorabami ne zadostujeta za nadaljnji razvoj proizvodov z geografsko označbo; meni, da je treba zakonodajo Unije spremeniti tako, da bi lahko države članice pooblastile organizacije, ki jih imenujejo ali potrdijo za upravljanje, zaščito in/ali spodbujanje geografskih označb, da na podlagi enakih in nediskriminacijskih načel prilagodijo proizvodne zmogljivosti zahtevam na trgu;
Considers that, on the basis of producers‘ experience, it has emerged that the management of product quality through PDO and PGI specifications and the effectiveness of protection against usurpations are not sufficient for the further development of GI products; takes the view that EU legislation should be amended so as to enable Member States to recognise and enhance the proper role of organisations which they designate or recognise as responsible for the management, protection and/or promotion of GIs and their intellectual property rights and to authorise such organisations to adapt production potential to market demands, on the basis of fair and non-discriminatory rules;
geografske označbe z namenom opredeliti zakonodajo na področju upravljanja količin in uporabe geografskih označb pri svojih proizvodih; meni, da bi konzorciji morali sodelovati pri usklajevanju gospodarskih subjektov, da bi s tem omogočili pravičnejše ravnotežje med količino proizvodov, ki se posredujejo na trg, in količino, ki jo ta lahko sprejme, ter tudi pri spodbujanju kmetov in potrošnikov; meni, da bo tako bolje zagotovljena trajnost različnih stopenj proizvodnje, predelave in distribucije, ki je nujna za zagotavljanje življenja na podeželju; dodaja, da je uravnavanje količine eden izmed pogojev za dobro uravnavanje kakovosti; meni, da bi morala biti opredelitev vloge konzorcijev določena v zakonodaji Skupnosti; meni, da bi bilo mogoče preučiti prakse in izkušnje različnih držav v Uniji ter jih uporabiti za opredelitev pravic in dolžnosti konzorcijev;
, with a view to defining the legislation with regard to both volume management and use of geographical indications in respect of the goods produced; considers that consortia should be able to play a role in the coordination of economic operators, with a view to bringing quantities produced and placed on the market as closely into line as possible with the quantities that the market can absorb, and in promotion measures vis-à-vis farmers and consumers; considers that this would more effectively guarantee the long-term viability of the different stages of production, processing and distribution, which is essential to the life of rural areas; adds that quantity control is one of the requirements of quality control; takes the view that the definition of the role of consortia should be included in Community legislation; considers that practices and experiences identified in the various EU Member States could be recorded and used in defining the rights and duties of consortia;
poudarja, da je treba racionalizirati postopek obravnave zahtevkov za registracijo, vendar ne podpira zamisli, da bi postopek pregledovanja skrajšali tako, da bi v zgodnji fazi arbitrarno zavrnili zahtevke, ki jih Komisija oceni kot nepopolne; obžaluje, da se začetno stališče Komisije v mnogih primerih oblikuje prenaglo ali ne ustreza danemu primeru zaradi nepopolnega razumevanja posebnih značilnosti proizvoda ali lokalnega trga;
Stresses the need to streamline the processing of applications for registration, but does not support the idea of shortening the scrutiny process by arbitrarily rejecting applications which the Commission deems incomplete at an early stage; deplores the fact that, in many cases, the Commission's initial views are formed too hastily or do not fit the case in hand, owing to an imperfect understanding of the specific characteristics of a product or a local market;
poziva Komisijo, naj opravi študijo o ustreznih informacijah (z označevanjem in vsemi ostalimi razpoložljivimi sredstvi), ki so potrebne za proizvode z zaščitenimi označbami porekla (ZOP) in zaščitenimi geografskimi označbami (ZGO), kadar se proizvod trži pod zasebnim tržnim imenom proizvajalca; poziva k obvezni navedbi imena proizvajalca pri registraciji zaščitene označbe porekla in zaščitene geografske označbe, kadar se proizvod trži pod zasebnim tržnim imenom prodajalca;
Calls on the Commission to conduct a study with regard to the appropriate information (labelling and all other means available) required for PDO/PGI products marketed under the private trade name of a retailer; calls for PDO and PGI registration of the producer's name to be compulsory where the product is marketed under the private trade name of a retailer;
meni, da mora biti v primeru, ko se proizvod, ki je zaščiten z geografsko označbo, uporabi kot sestavina, organ, odgovoren za to označbo, ali drugi pristojni organ sposoben opredeliti pravila uporabe tega imena v prodajnih označbah predelanih proizvodov in da mora biti pooblaščen za izvajanje posebnih pregledov, ali so značilnosti, videz ali ugled proizvoda z geografsko označbo ostali nespremenjeni; meni, da mora Komisija oblikovati jasne smernice glede uporabe imen proizvodov z geografsko označbo, ki se uporabijo kot sestavine, na oznakah predelanega proizvoda, da bi se izognili vsakršnemu zavajanju potrošnika;
Considers that, where a product protected by a GI is used as an ingredient, the body responsible for the GI or the competent authority should be able to lay down rules governing the use of its name in the sales names of processed products, and should be authorised to carry out specific checks to verify that the GI product's characteristics, image and reputation have not been adulterated; considers that the Commission should establish clear guidelines regarding use of the names of GI products used as ingredients on the labels of processed products, so as to avoid consumers being misled;
se strinja z oblikovanjem pravil na ravni Skupnosti, ki bodo organom, zadolženim za upravljanje geografskih označb, omogočili določanje pravil za pakiranje svojih proizvodov, da bi se izognili vsakršnemu poslabšanju visoke kakovosti teh proizvodov;
Endorses the establishment of Community rules to enable GI management bodies to lay down packaging rules for their products in order to ensure that their high quality is in no way diminished;
nasprotuje stališču, da je geografske označbe mogoče nadomestiti z blagovnimi znamkami, saj gre za bistveno drugačne pravne instrumente; poudarja, da je treba bolje pojasniti razlike med blagovnimi znamkami in geografskimi označbami; poziva k učinkovitemu izvajanju obstoječih predpisov Skupnosti, ki določajo, da subjekti, ki ne predstavljajo združenj proizvajalcev neke ZOP/ZGO, ne morejo registrirati blagovne znamke, ki vsebuje ali se sklicuje na to ZOP/ZGO;
Opposes the idea that GIs can be replaced by trademarks, as these are fundamentally different legal instruments; stresses that the differences between trademarks and GIs need to be better explained; calls for effective implementation of existing Community rules making it impossible for a trademark containing or referring to PDOs/PGIs to be registered by operators who do not represent the producers‘ organisations for such PDOs/PGIs;
ter z boljšo opredelitvijo veljavnih postopkov nadzora v vseh fazah, tako pred trženjem izdelkov kot po njem;
and through better definition of the control procedures applicable at all stages of the marketing of products both before and after they are placed on the market;
meni, da je treba ohraniti instrument zajamčenih tradicionalnih posebnosti, medtem ko je treba ustrezna pravila registriranja še poenostaviti; v zvezi s tem poziva Komisijo, naj ponovno pregleda instrument zajamčenih tradicionalnih posebnosti in preuči možnosti, da bi se ponudila boljša zaščita proizvodov iz te sheme, kot tudi druga sredstva, zaradi katerih bi bila ta shema privlačnejša proizvajalcem; opozarja, da je zajamčena tradicionalna posebnost razmeroma nov instrument, kar je razlog za njegov počasen razvoj; meni, da bi bilo treba ta instrument bolje predstaviti proizvajalcem in omogočiti, da postane prepoznavno orodje za spodbujanje kakovosti v Evropi;
Considers that the instrument of Traditional Specialities Guaranteed (TSG) must be kept, whilst the corresponding rules for registration need further simplification; calls, in this respect, on the Commission to review the TSG instrument, study the possibilities of speeding up the application procedure and explore possibilities for offering better product protection under this scheme, as well as any other means which may render this particular scheme more attractive to producers; recalls that TSG is a relatively recent instrument, which explains its slow development; considers that this instrument should be better communicated to producers and allowed to become a familiar tool for quality promotion in Europe;
meni, da bi morala Komisija pretehtati možnost ustanovitve evropske baze znanja o starih receptih in zgodovinskih načinih priprave jedi, da bi preprečili izginjanje znanja o tradicionalnih jedeh in načinih priprave, ki se je prenašalo iz roda v rod;
Considers that, in order to prevent the disappearance of knowledge about traditional food and how it has been prepared for generations, the Commission should consider creating a European knowledge bank for old recipes and historical food preparation methods;
podpira uvedbo mehanizmov, ki bodo omogočili skupno vrednotenje in spodbujanje majhnih tradicionalnih, lokalnih in obrtniških obratov, ki so tesno vezani na posamezno območje in imajo geografsko ime, za katere so postopki pridobitve zaščitene označbe porekla/zaščitene geografske označbe zelo zahtevni in dragi;
Supports the establishment of tools for the collective promotion and publicising of small traditional, local and artisanal products linked to specific areas and bearing a geographical name, for which PDO/PGI access procedures would be too cumbersome and costly;
opozarja, da se nekatere geografske označbe v tretjih državah sistematično zlorabljajo; to spodkopava ugled in podobo proizvodov z geografskimi označbami in zavaja potrošnike; poudarja, da je zagotavljanje varstva geografskih označb v tretjih državah dolg in zapleten postopek za proizvajalce, saj je vsaka tretja država verjetno razvila svoj sistem varovanja; poziva Evropsko komisijo, naj tehnično in finančno podpre organizacije, pristojne za geografske označbe, da bi se olajšala reševanje težav z zlorabami;
Recalls that some GIs are systematically counterfeited in third countries; this undermines the reputation and image of the GI product and misleads consumers; emphasises that securing protection of a GI in a third country is a long and difficult procedure for producers, since each third country may have developed its own specific protection system; invites the European Commission to support technically and financially the organisations in charge of GIs in order to facilitate the resolution of usurpation problems;
poziva k večji zaščiti geografskih označb
Calls for greater protection of geographical indications
v STO, s hkratno razširitvijo zaščite iz člena 23 sporazuma TRIPS na vse geografske označbe in z vzpostavitvijo pravno obvezujočega večstranskega registra geografskih označb; in
in the WTO, both by extending protection under Article 23 of the TRIPS agreement to all GIs and by establishing a legally binding multilateral register for GIs, and
v tretjih državah, s sklenitvijo dvostranskih sporazumov, zlasti z ekonomsko pomembnimi državami;
in third countries, by negotiating bilateral agreements, in particular with economically significant countries;
podpira namero Komisije, da geografske označbe vključi v trgovinski sporazum za boj proti ponarejanju in v delo prihodnje evropske opazovalne skupine za ponarejanje in piratstvo; ter
supports the Commission's aim to include geographical indications within the scope of the ‘Anti-counterfeiting trade agreement’ and in the work of the future ‘European observatory on counterfeiting and piracy’; and
meni, da mora Komisija pred pričetkom trgovinskih pogajanj in med samimi pogajanji tesneje sodelovati z organi, ki predstavljajo proizvajalce izdelkov z geografsko označbo;
considers that the Commission should work more closely with bodies representing GI producers prior to the launch of trade negotiations and during the negotiating process;
meni, da je resničen napredek v zvezi z geografskimi označbami glavni pogoj za uravnotežen sporazum v okviru kmetijskih pogajanj pri STO;
considers genuine progress regarding geographical indications to be an essential precondition for balanced agreement in the context of WTO agricultural negotiations;
meni, da je treba spodbujati proizvodne sisteme, ki so okolju prijazni in temeljijo na racionalizaciji vloženih sredstev, kot velja za „integrirano pridelavo“;
Believes it is necessary to promote production systems that are environment-friendly and based on a rationalisation of inputs, as is the case with ‘integrated production’;
poudarja, da bi z uvedbo zakonodaje o integrirani pridelavi na evropski ravni postala vidnejša prizadevanja kmetov in živinorejcev EU za varnost hrane, okolje in dobro počutje živali vpričo uvozu iz tretjih držav; meni, da je treba hkrati izvesti promocijsko in tržno kampanjo za evropsko integrirano pridelavo;
Stresses that introducing legislation at European level on integrated production would raise the profile of the efforts being made by the EU's farmers and stockbreeders in the areas of food safety, the environment and animal welfare vis-à-vis third-country imports; believes that there should simultaneously be a promotion and marketing campaign for European integrated production;
podpira spodbujanje sistemov proizvodnje kakovostnih živil v skladu s trajnostnimi merili, kot je na primer integrirana pridelava; poziva k oblikovanju zakonodaje Skupnosti za to področje, da se poenotijo merila, ki obstajajo v različnih državah članicah, in k ustrezni spremljajoči promocijski kampanji, da se potrošniki seznanijo z najpomembnejšimi vidiki integrirane pridelave;
Supports promoting systems for producing quality food products using sustainable criteria, as in the case of integrated production; calls for the Community regulation of this area, with a view to unifying the criteria existing in the different Member States, to be backed up by a suitable promotion campaign informing the consumer of the main features of integrated production in Europe;
ponovno izraža prepričanje, da sta ekološko kmetovanje in integrirana pridelava koristna za zdravje potrošnikov, hkrati pa zagotavljata, da je proizvodni proces potekal brez okoljske škode, ki ponavadi nastane pri uporabi gnojil, evropskim kmetom pa omogočata tudi veliko priložnost za rast, čeprav sama po sebi nista rešitev vprašanja svetovne oskrbe s hrano v prihodnosti; podpira najnovejša prizadevanja za oblikovanje novega ekološkega logotipa EU, ki bo veljal za vse proizvode, pridelane v EU;
Reaffirms its belief that organic farming and integrated production offer health benefits to consumers, as well as a guarantee that the production process involved avoids environmental damage associated with the use of fertilisers, and also offers European farmers a major growth opportunity, even though it is not in itself the solution to the issue of future global food supplies; supports recent efforts to develop a new EU organic logo, applicable to all EU farmed products;
, in upa, da se bodo njegova pravila čim prej v celoti izvajala, čeprav je šele nedavno začel veljati;
, and hopes that, even though it has come into force only recently, it will fulfil all of its legislative potential as soon as possible;
poudarja, da imajo države članice in tudi EU dolžnost spodbujati kakovostne proizvode in jih zaščititi na mednarodni ravni; v zvezi s tem meni, da je treba strožje nadzirati ekološke proizvode iz tretjih držav zaradi poštene konkurence med ekološkimi proizvodi iz EU in iz tretjih držav;
Stresses that both the Member States and the EU have the duty to promote quality products and their protection at international level; believes, in this connection, that more stringent controls are needed on organic products from third countries, in the interests of fair competition between EU and third-country organic products;
meni, da označevanje proizvodov iz običajnega kmetijstva na način, ki vzbuja občutek, da ti proizvodi prihajajo iz ekološke pridelave, ovira razvoj notranjega trga za ekološko pridelane proizvode v EU; zato izraža zaskrbljenost spričo prizadevanj za razširitev uporabe znaka za ekološke proizvode tudi na proizvode, ki niso proizvedeni v skladu z načeli ekološkega kmetijstva;
Considers that the appearance of non-organic products labelled in such a way as to suggest that they are products of organic farming harms the development of a single EU market in organic products; in this connection, expresses concern at attempts to extend the scope of the organic label to food products not produced in accordance with organic farming principles;
je zaskrbljen nad vse večjim številom zasebnih ekoloških označb pri neprehrambenih proizvodih, sektorju, ki je v velikem razmahu in ga ne pokriva Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 834/2007 z dne 28. junija 2007 o ekološki pridelavi in označevanju ekoloških proizvodov in razveljavitvi Uredbe (EGS) št. 2092/91; zahteva od Komisije, da preuči možnost razširitve uredbe na ta sektor;
Is concerned at the growing number of private organic labels in non-food products, a rapidly expanding sector which is not covered by Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91; calls on the Commission to assess whether the provisions should be extended to cover this sector;
ponavlja, da je za boljše delovanje notranjega trga za ekološke proizvode v EU treba:
Reaffirms that, in order to improve the functioning of the internal market in organic products, it is necessary to: