natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
meni, da bi morala Komisija razmisliti, ali bi bila v nekaterih okoliščinah uporaba dveh obveznih ocen ustrezna, na primer za strukturirane finančne instrumente in za vse zunanje bonitetne ocene, uporabljene v regulativne namene, in ali bi morala najbolj zadržana, kar pomeni najmanj ugodna, zunanja bonitetna ocena veljati za referenco za regulativni namen; poziva Komisijo, naj pripravi oceno učinka za morebitno uporabo obeh obveznih ocen;
Is of the opinion that the Commission should consider whether, under certain circumstances, the use of two obligatory ratings is appropriate e.g. for structured finance instruments and for any external credit ratings used for regulatory purposes and whether the most conservative, meaning least favourable, external credit rating should be regarded as the reference for regulatory purpose; asks the Commission to produce an impact assessment on the potential use of two obligatory ratings;
meni, da bi moral stroške obeh ocen kriti izdajatelj in da bi prvo zunanjo bonitetno oceno morala opraviti najeta bonitetna agencija, ki bi jo izbral izdajatelj, za pripravo druge zunanje bonitetne ocene pa bi bilo treba upoštevati različne možnosti, vključno s tem, da bi jo naročil Evropski organ za vrednostne papirje in trge (ESMA) na podlagi posebnih, opredeljenih in objektivnih meril, pri čemer bi upoštevali predhodno uspešnost in podprl ustanovitev novih bonitetnih agencij, kar bi obenem pomenilo preprečitev izkrivljanja konkurence;
Considers that the costs of both ratings should be borne by the issuer and that the first external credit rating should be by a hired CRA, at the choice of the issuer, while for the second external credit rating various options for the assignment should be considered, including the possibility of assignment by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), on the basis of specific, defined and objective criteria, taking historic performance into account and supporting the establishment of new CRAs while avoiding any distortions of competition;
poudarja, da ugleda ne more ustvariti regulator, da pa bo vsaka nova bonitetna agencija sprejeta samo, če si bo pridobila verodostojnost;
Points out that reputation cannot be imposed by a regulator, but that every new CRA will only become accepted if it gains credibility;
Bonitetne ocene državnih dolžniških instrumentov
Sovereign debt rating
se zaveda dejstva, da igralci na trgu zaradi visokih posledičnih stroškov (v zvezi s prodajnimi ali nakupnimi odločitvami prilagajanja ocen) niso naklonjeni nestanovitnim bonitetnim ocenam; kljub temu meni, da so ocene zaradi tega prociklične in zaostajajo za razvojem na finančnih trgih;
Is aware of the fact that market players are averse to volatile credit ratings because of the high costs involved (in related sell or buy decisions) when ratings are adjusted; considers, however, that consequently ratings tend to be procyclical and to lag behind financial market developments;
opozarja, da morajo bonitetne agencije uporabljati jasna merila za ocenjevanje uspešnosti države, se pa zaveda, da pri dejanski oceni ne gre za samodejno vrednotenje teh dejavnikov; poziva panogo, naj pojasni, katera metodologija in presoja se uporabljata za pripravo bonitetnih ocen držav, ter razloži odstopanje od teh ocen, nastalih na podlagi modela, ter od napovedi glavnih mednarodnih finančnih institucij;
Notes that CRAs shall use clear criteria to score country performance, is aware of the fact that the actual rating is not a mechanical weighting of these factors; asks the industry to clarify which methodology and judgments are used to calibrate sovereign ratings and to explain deviation from these model-generated ratings and from the forecasts of the main international financial institutions;
ugotavlja, da po mnenju Mednarodnega denarnega sklada bonitetne ocene lahko razložijo skoraj 70 % razmikov kreditnih zamenjav; je zaskrbljen zaradi procikličnih učinkov, ki jih lahko imajo ocene, in zahteva, da je treba ta občutljiva vprašanja posebej obravnavati;
Notes that, according to the IMF, ratings could explain up to almost 70% of the CDS spreads; is concerned about the procyclical effects that ratings may have and demands a special consideration of these sensitive issues;
meni, da je treba za zmanjšanje negativnih mejnih učinkov v cenah in zamenjavah, ki jih pomenijo spremembe ocen, odpraviti ureditev, ki tesno povezuje odločitve za nakup ali prodajo;
Believes that, in order to reduce the negative ‘cliff effects’ in prices and spreads that rating changes imply, the regulation that hardwires buy or sell decisions to ratings should be eliminated;
meni, da so skoraj vse informacije o državah na voljo javnosti, zato bi morale biti take informacije lažje, dosledno in primerljivo dostopne, da bi večje in bolj izkušene akterje na trgu spodbudili k zanašanju na lastno presojo o ocenjevanju kreditnega tveganja držav;
Considers that, as almost all information on sovereigns is available in the public domain, such information should be made more easily, consistently and comparably available so that larger and more sophisticated market players are incentivised to rely on their own judgment to assess sovereign credit risk;
meni, da je treba glede na učinek, ki ga lahko imajo bonitetne ocene o državnih dolžniških instrumentih na trg, na tem področju izboljšati preglednost glede metod in razlogov za odločitve, pa tudi glede odgovornosti bonitetnih agencij; poziva k izvedbi študije, da bi v ocenjevanje vključili prihodnjo Evropsko fundacijo in prihodnjo neodvisno evropsko bonitetno agencijo;
Believes that, given the effects that credit ratings of sovereign debt can have on the market, transparency about the methods and the reasons for decisions as well as the liability of CRAs need to be improved in this field; calls for a study to involve in this rating the future European Foundation and the future independent European Credit Rating Agency;
podpira večje razkritje in razlago metodologij, modelov in ključnih predpostavk za ocene, ki jih sprejmejo bonitetne agencije, med drugim tudi z vidika sistemskega vpliva, ki bi ga imelo zmanjšanje državnega dolga;
Supports enhanced disclosure and explanation of methodologies, models and key rating assumptions adopted by credit rating agencies, also in light of the systemic impact that a downgrade on sovereign debt may produce;
meni, da so javne informacije o povprečju obstoječih zunanjih bonitetnih ocen, ki jih pripravijo akreditirane bonitetne agencije, dragocene; zato predlaga, da bi oblikovali evropski indeks bonitetnega ocenjevanja (EURIX), ki bi vključeval vse ocene registriranih bonitetnih agencij, ki so na voljo na trgu;
Considers that public information on the average of existing external credit ratings from accredited CRAs is valuable; suggests therefore establishing a European Rating Index (EURIX) which incorporates all ratings of registered CRAs that are available on the market;
Mikroraven: poslovni model
Micro level: business model
podpira obstoj različnih plačilnih modelov v panogi, vendar opozarja na nevarnost navzkrižja interesov, ki jo je treba obravnavati z ustreznimi sredstvi preglednosti in regulativnimi sredstvi, pri čemer ne bi smeli naložiti nezaželenega modela; na podlagi nedavnega posvetovanja poziva Komisijo, naj pripravi predloge alternativnih izvedljivih plačilnih modelov, ki bodo vključevali tako izdajatelje kot tudi uporabnike; v zvezi s tem poziva Komisijo, naj posebno pozornost nameni možni uporabi modela, po katerem „plača vlagatelj“, ter njegovim prednostim in pomanjkljivostim, da bi bile ocene manj izpostavljene navzkrižju interesov;
Supports the existence of various payment models in the industry but highlights the existence of risks of conflicts of interest which need to be addressed by appropriate transparency and regulatory means while not imposing an unwarranted model; asks the Commission, based on the recent consultation, to come forward with proposals for alternative viable payment models that involve both issuers and users; asks the Commission in this respect to pay particular attention to the potential use of the ‘investor-pays’ model and its advantages and disadvantages in order to make ratings less prone to conflicts of interest;
meni, da je dobro upravljanje bonitetnih agencij bistveno za zagotovitev kakovostnih ocen, ter poziva, da morajo bonitetne agencije omogočiti popolno preglednost glede veljavnih pravil upravljanja;
Takes the view that good governance in CRAs is crucial to ensure the quality of ratings and calls for full transparency from CRAs on the governance arrangements in place;
opozarja, da je Evropski organ za vrednostne papirje in trge pristojen za izvajanje in doseganje skladnosti bonitetnih agencij z Uredbo (ES) št. 1060/2009; meni, da zunanje bonitetne ocene, če izpolnjujejo regulativni namen, ne bi smele veljati zgolj za mnenja in da bi morale bonitetne agencije nositi odgovornost za dosledno izvajanje osnovne metodologije za svoje bonitetne ocene; zato priporoča, da bi izpostavljenost bonitetnih agencij do civilne odgovornosti v primeru hude malomarnosti ali neprimernega vedenja dosledno opredelili po vsej EU ter da bi morala Komisija opredeliti načine za tako civilno odgovornost, ki bi jo utrdili v civilnem pravu držav članic;
Highlights that ESMA is responsible for implementing and enforcing the compliance of CRAs with Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009; considers that if external credit ratings fulfil a regulatory purpose they should not be classified as mere opinions, and that CRAs should be held accountable for the consistent application of the underlying methodology of their credit ratings; recommends therefore that CRAs' exposure to civil liability in the event of gross negligence or misconduct be defined on a consistent basis across the EU and that the Commission should identify ways for such civil liability to be anchored in Member States' civil law;
poudarja, da je končna odgovornost za naložbeno odločitev na strani udeleženca na finančnem trgu, torej upravljavca premoženja, finančne institucije ali izkušenega vlagatelja; ugotavlja, da bi odgovornost nadalje podprl tudi osrednji register (CEREP), ustanovljenim s prvo uredbo o bonitetnih agencijah, ki bi v standardizirani obliki objavljal podatke o uspešnosti ocen bonitetnih agencij, registriranih v EU, s čimer bi vlagateljem omogočili lastno presojo nekaterih bonitetnih agencij in s tem izvajali pritisk na podlagi ugleda; poudarja, da bi morali imeti vlagatelji učinkovite zmogljivosti obvladovanja tveganja pod ustreznim upravnim nadzorom;
Points out that the ultimate responsibility for an investment decision lies with the financial market participant, i.e. the asset manager, financial institution or sophisticated investor; notes that accountability will also be further supported by the central repository (CEREP) established by CRA1, which publishes data in a standardised form on the performance of ratings issued by CRAs registered within the EU, allowing investors to make their own assessment about certain CRAs, and thereby exerting more reputational pressure; points out that investors should have effective risk management capabilities subject to adequate oversight by the administration;
meni, da bi morala vsaka bonitetna agencija opraviti letni pregled in tako oceniti svoje pretekle rezultate bonitetnega ocenjevanja ter da bi morala te informacije zbrati v poročilu o odgovornosti, namenjenemu nadzorniku; meni, da bi Evropski organ za vrednostne papirje in trge moral redno izvajati naključna preverjanja poročil o odgovornosti ter tako zagotoviti visok standard kakovosti bonitetnih ocen;
Suggests that each registered CRA should conduct an annual review to assess its past credit rating performance and should compile this information in an accountability report for the supervisor; suggests that the ESMA should carry out random checks on accountability reports on a regular basis to ensure a high quality standard in credit ratings;
Resolucija Evropskega parlamenta z dne 8. junija 2011 o zagotavljanju neodvisnih ocen učinka ( 2010/2016(INI) )
European Parliament resolution of 8 June 2011 on guaranteeing independent impact assessments ( 2010/2016(INI) )
ob upoštevanju Lizbonske pogodbe in Listine Evropske unije o temeljnih pravicah, ki sta začeli veljati 1. decembra 2009,
having regard to the Lisbon Treaty and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which entered into force on 1 December 2009,
ob upoštevanju sporočila Komisije z dne 8. oktobra 2010 z naslovom „Pametna pravna ureditev v Evropski uniji“ ( KOM(2010)0543 ),
having regard to the Commission communication of 8 October 2010 on Smart Regulation in the European Union ( COM(2010)0543 ),
ob upoštevanju svoje resolucije z dne 9. septembra 2010 o boljši pripravi zakonodaje – 15. letno poročilo Evropske komisije o uporabi načel subsidiarnosti in sorazmernosti v skladu s členom 9 Protokola Sprejeta besedila, P7_TA(2010)0311 .
having regard to its resolution of 9 September 2010 on better lawmaking – 15th annual report from the Commission pursuant to Article 9 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality Texts adopted, P7_TA(2010)0311 .
ob upoštevanju svoje resolucije z dne 21. oktobra 2008 o boljši pripravi zakonodaje 2006 v skladu s členom 9 Protokola o uporabi načel subsidiarnosti in sorazmernosti UL C 15 E, 21.1.2010, str.
having regard to its resolution of 21 October 2008 on better lawmaking 2006 pursuant to Article 9 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality OJ C 15 E, 21.1.2010, p.
ob upoštevanju svoje resolucije z dne 4. septembra 2007 o boljši pripravi zakonodaje 2005: Uporaba načel subsidiarnosti in sorazmernosti – 13. letno poročilo UL C 187 E, 24.7.2008, str.
having regard to its resolution of 4 September 2007 on better lawmaking 2005: application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality – 13th annual report OJ C 187 E, 24.7.2008, p.
ob upoštevanju svoje resolucije z dne 10. julija 2007 o zniževanju z zakonodajo predpisanih upravnih stroškov UL C 175 E, 10.7.2008, str.
having regard to its resolution of 10 July 2007 on minimising administrative costs imposed by legislation OJ C 175 E, 10.7.2008, p.
ob upoštevanju svoje resolucije z dne 16. maja 2006 o boljši pripravi zakonodaje 2004: Uporaba načela subsidiarnosti – Dvanajsto letno poročilo UL C 297 E, 7.12.2006, str.
having regard to its resolution of 16 May 2006 on better lawmaking 2004: application of the principle of subsidiarity – 12th annual report OJ C 297 E, 07.12.2006, p.
ob upoštevanju Medinstitucionalnega sporazuma med Evropskim parlamentom, Svetom in Komisijo z dne 16. decembra 2003 o boljši pripravi zakonodaje,
having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement on better law-making concluded between Parliament, the Council and the Commission on 16 December 2003,
ob upoštevanju skupnega medinstitucionalnega pristopa k pripravi ocen učinka, o katerem so se novembra 2005 dogovorili Parlament, Svet in Komisija,
having regard to the Interinstitutional Common Approach to Impact Assessments concluded between Parliament, the Council and the Commission in November 2005,
ob upoštevanju posebnega poročila Evropskega računskega sodišča št. 2/2010,
having regard to Special Report No 3/2010 of the European Court of Auditors,
ob upoštevanju ugotovitev študije o ocenah učinka v državah članicah EU, ki jo je naročil Evropski parlament,
having regard to the results of the study commissioned by the European Parliament on impact assessments in the EU Member States,
ob upoštevanju smernic Komisije z dne 15. januarja 2009 za izvajanje ocen učinka in prilog k tem smernicam ( SEK(2009)0092 ),
having regard to the Commission's Impact Assessment Guidelines of 15 January 2009, and the annexes thereto ( SEC(2009)0092 ),
ob upoštevanju sporočila Komisije z dne 5. junija 2002 o oceni učinka ( KOM(2002)0276 ),
having regard to the Commission communication of 5 June 2002 on impact assessment ( COM(2002)0276 ),
ob upoštevanju okvirnega sporazuma o odnosih med Evropskim parlamentom in Evropsko komisijo z dne 20. oktobra 2010,
having regard to the Framework Agreement of 20 October 2010 between Parliament and the Commission,
ob upoštevanju sporočila Komisije z dne 28. oktobra 2010 z naslovom „Celostna industrijska politika za dobo globalizacije: konkurenčnost in trajnost v središču pozornosti“ ( KOM(2010)0614 ),
having regard to the Commission communication of 28 October 2010 on an Integrated Industrial Policy for the Globalisation Era: Putting Competitiveness and Sustainability at Centre Stage ( COM(2010)0614 ),
ob upoštevanju poročila odbora za oceno učinka iz leta 2010 ( SEK(2011)0126 ),
having regard to the Impact Assessment Board Report for 2010 of 24 January 2011 ( SEC(2011)0126 ),
ob upoštevanju pisma z dne 16. novembra 2010, ki ga je predsednica Odbora za pravice žensk in enakost spolov poslala poročevalki o pridobljeni izkušnji po oceni učinka, ki je bila opravljena glede učinka, ki ga je imelo podaljšanje porodniškega dopusta na 20 tednov,
having regard to the letter of 16 November 2010 from the Chair of the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality to the rapporteur on the experiences gained from an impact assessment conducted concerning the effect of extending maternity leave to 20 weeks,
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 ),
ker ocene učinka predstavljajo sistematično vrednotenje pričakovanih posledic zakonodajnih ukrepov,
whereas impact assessments present a systematic evaluation of the likely effects of legislative action,
ker mora biti uvedba preglednega, jasnega, učinkovitega in visokokakovostnega regulativnega okolja ena od prednostnih nalog politike Evropske unije,
whereas establishing a transparent, clear, effective and high-quality regulatory environment should be a priority objective of European Union policy,
ker ocene učinka pozitivno prispevajo k splošno kakovostnejši zakonodaji Skupnosti v smislu njene boljše priprave,
whereas impact assessments make a positive contribution to the overall enhancement of the quality of EU legislation in the interest of better lawmaking,
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,
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,
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;
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;
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,
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,
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,
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,
ker se je Evropski parlament večkrat zavzel za uvedbo neodvisnih ocen učinka v Evropski uniji,
whereas Parliament has on a number of occasions expressed support for the use of independent impact assessments in the European Union,
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,
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,
ker ocene učinka ne smejo postavljati novih, nepotrebnih birokratskih ovir pri nadaljnjem razvoju ali uveljavljanju evropske zakonodaje in politik,
whereas impact assessments may be used to create unnecessary bureaucratic impediments to the further development or entry into force of European legislation and policies,
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,
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,
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,
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,
poudarja, da so ocene učinka pomembno orodje za pametne in boljše predpise v celotnem političnem ciklusu, ki bi ga morali pripravljavci predpisov EU pogosteje uporabljati kot pomoč pri učinkovitejšem ovrednotenju gospodarskih, socialnih, okoljskih in zdravstvenih posledic njihovih političnih izbir in njihovega učinka za temeljne pravice državljanov, pri tem pa bi morali ves čas kot enega izmed meril upoštevati analizo stroškov in koristi;
Stresses that impact assessments are an important aid to smart and better lawmaking during the whole policy cycle which the makers of EU law should exploit more often in order to help them evaluate more effectively the economic, social, environmental and health related consequences of their policy options, as well as their impact on citizens' fundamental rights, bearing in mind that cost/benefit-analysis constitutes one criterion among others;