natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The audit work was carried out at Commission headquarters and in a sample of seven Member States: Finland, France, Greece, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, and Slovenia.
Revizijsko deloje biloizvedeno nasedežu Komisijein na vzorcusedmih držav članic: Finske, Francije, Grčije, Nizozemske, Poljske, Portugalske in Slovenije.
On-the-spot visits took place between September and November 2007.
Obiski na krajusamemso biliizvedeni medseptembromin novembromleta 2007.
Audit evidence was collected and examined by means of interviews and analysis of documents and data.
Revizijski dokazi so bili zbraniin preverjeni z razgovori ter analizo dokumentov in podatkov.
In each Member State a number of farms were visitedinordertoreview, with the farmers and the inspectors charged with carrying out the on-the-spot checks, the implementation of cross compliance atfarmlevel.
V vsaki od teh držav članic so bile obiskane številne kmetije, da bi se skupaj s kmeti in inšpektorji, zadolženimi za izvedbo pregledov na kraju samem, pregledalo izvajanje navzkrižne skladnosti na ravni kmetij.
THE OBJECTIVES ARE NOT DEFINEDIN A “SMART” MANNER
CILJI NISO OPREDELJENI V OBLIKI „SMART“
They are not formu-latedin the operative paragraphs of the Regulation butin the “whereas” paragraphs, and are expressed asfollows:
Niso oblikovani v operativnih odstavkih Uredbe, ampak v uvodnihizjavah,izraženi pasotakole:
(a)“Thefull payment of directaidshould belinkedtocompliance with rulesrelating to agriculturalland, agricultural production and activity.
(a)„Celotno plačilo neposredne pomoči mora biti pogojeno z izpolnitvijo pravil v zvezi s kmetijskim zemljiščem, kmetijsko proizvodnjo in dejavnostjo.
Those rules should serve to incorporate in the common market organisations basic standards for the environment, food safety, animal healthand welfare and good agricultural and environmental condition” (paragraph 2);
Namen teh pravil je vključiti v skupne ureditve trgov osnovne standardeza okolje, varno hrano,zdravjein dobro počutježivaliter dobre kmetijskein okoljske pogoje“(uvodnaizjava 2);
(b)“In ordertoavoidtheabandonment ofagriculturallandandensure thatitis maintained in good agricultural and environmental condition, standards should be established which mayor maynothavea basisin provisions ofthe Member States”(paragraph 3);
(b)„Da bi se izognili opuščanju kmetijskih zemljišč in da bi zagotovili, da seta obdelujejo vskladu z dobrimi kmetijskimiin okoljskimi pogoji, je treba uvesti standarde, katerih podlaga solahko ali pa ne predpisi držav članic“(uvodnaizjava 3);
(c) “Since permanent pasture has a positive environmental effect, it is appropriate to adopt measures to encourage the maintenance of existing permanent pasture to avoid a massiveconversionintoarable land”(paragraph 4).
(c)„Ker imajo trajni travniki ugoden učinek na okolje, je primerno sprejeti ukrepe za spodbuditev ohranjevanja obstoječih trajnih travnikov, da ne bi prišlo do množičnega spreminjanja njihove namembnosti v orna zemljišča“(uvodnaizjava 4).
As can be seen from the above quotation, the objectives set out by the Council are fairly general, as befits the wording of high-level legislation.
Kot je razvidno iz zgornjih navedb, je Svet določil precej splošne cilje, kar se pričakuje od besedila zakonodaje na visoki ravni.
However, they were not further developed and detailed in the operative paragraphs of the Council Regulation orinits annexes.
Vendar ti cilji niso bili nadalje razvitiin podrobno določeni v operativnih odstavkih Uredbe Sveta ali v njenih prilogah.
Annex III lists SMRs which,in effect, consist in a series of articles pertaining to pre-existing Regulations and Directivesthat were not establishedinthe context of cross compliance.
V Prilogi III so navedene predpisane zahteve ravnanja, ki jih dejansko predstavlja vrsta členov iz že obstoječih uredb in direktiv, ki niso bile pripravljene v okviru navzkrižne skladnosti.
Similarly, Annex IV articulates very general “issues” and “standards” that are intended to define good agricultural and environmental condition but are also not directly applicable at farm level.
Podobno so v Prilogi IV zelo na splošno navedeni „zadeve“ in „standardi“ za opredelitev dobrihkmetijskihin okoljskih pogojev,vendarsetudite zadevein standardi ne uporabljajo neposredno na ravni kmetij.
Withfewexceptions (for instance the requirements deriving from the Regulation on food and feedlaw, see Table 1) theselegal provisions were not clarified nor more precisely defined by the Commission or the Member States.
Komisija ali državečlanicerazen nekaterihizjem(na primerzahtev,kiizhajajoiz uredbe o zakonodaji o krmi in živilih, glej tabelo 1) teh zakonskih določb niso ne pojasnile ne natančneje določile.
The end result of this legal framework is that the objectives to be achieved by cross compliance are nowhere defined in a “SMART” manner.Theprinciples ofsoundfinancial management(to which Article 27(3) of the Financial Regulationofthe Council specifically refers) require, in particular, that policy objectives be formulated in a specific, measurable,achievable, relevantandtimed manner(inone word,theyshouldbe“SMART”)and that they be arranged into a hierarchy going down from the global to the intermediate, to the specific and the operational.
Končni izid tega pravnega okvira je, da cilji, ki naj bijih navzkrižna skladnost dosegla, niso nikjer opredeljeni v obliki „SMART“. Načela dobrega finančnega poslovodenja (na to seizrecno sklicuje člen 27(3) Finančne uredbe Sveta) zahtevajo zlasti, da socilji politikespecifični, merljivi, dosegljivi, ustrezniinčasovno opre-deljeni(oziromazeno besedo„SMART“)ter dase hierarhičnorazvrstijo od splošnih, vmesnih, specifičnih do operativnih.
Another principle whichis notfulfilledisthat performanceindicatorsand baselinelevels be established.
Še eno neizpolnjeno načelo je določitev kazalnikov uspešnosti in izhodiščnih ravni.
Duetothe absence of“SMART” objectives, performance indicators and baselinelevels, achievement of objectives cannot be precisely monitored(see also paragraphs 81to 84).
Doseganja ciljevni mogoče natančno spremljati, ker ni ciljev „SMART“, kazalnikov uspešnosti in izhodiščnih ravni (glej tudi odstavke 81 do 84).
As anillustration ofthesituation outlined above, one mayconsiderthe objective of avoiding the abandonment of agricultural land.
V ponazoritev zgoraj opisanega stanja bi lahko navedli primer cilja izogibanja opuščanju kmetijskih zemljišč.
The Commission did not provide a precise definition of land abandonment and did not explain which problems (environmental and/or social) needed to be addressed nor how cross compliance could contribute to this objective amongst the different available policy instruments.
Komisija ni zagotovila točne definicije opuščanja zemljišč in ni pojasnila, katere težave (okoljske in/ali socialne) bi bilo treba odpraviti, niti, kako bi lahko navzkrižna skladnost med različnimi razpoložljivimi instrumenti politike prispevala k temu cilju.
The Commission did not gather datato monitorthe different kinds ofland abandonment such asland whichis not used at all orsemi-abandoned.Inthe absence of more precise definitionsandthecollection ofrelevant data,itis not possibleto measure whetherthe objective of avoiding abandonment of agriculturallandis achieved.
Komisija ni zbirala podatkov zaspremljanjerazličnih vrst opuščanja zemljišč, kot so zemljišča, ki se sploh ne uporabljajo ali ki so napol opuščena. Ker ni natančnejših definicij in zbiranja ustreznih podatkov, ni mogoče izmeriti, alije ciljizogibanja opuščanju kmetijskih zemljišč dosežen.
In this context, the audit disclosed that, while some relevant obligations were imposed at farm level, depending on the Member State and the policy area concerned,in asignificant number of casesthese obligations were purely formal and could not be expected to produce the relevant results.
V okvirutegajerevizija pokazala, dasose odvisno od državečlanicein zadevnega področja politike sicer določile nekatere ustrezne obveznosti na ravni kmetij, vendar so bile te obveznosti v številnih primerih zgolj formalneinodnjihnibilo mogoče pričakovati ustreznih rezultatov.
Box 1 below provides examples of bothsituations.
V okviru 1spodajso navedeni primeri obehstanj.
THE EFFECTS OF CROSS COMPLIANCE AT FARM LEVEL
UČINKI NAVZKRIŽNE SKLADNOSTI NA RAVNI KMETIJ
Regarding the objective of incorporating basic environmental standards in the common market organisations, the Council Regulation refers to five Directives (see Table 1), and requires Member States to define operational requirements which farmers have to respect.
Uredba Sveta se glede cilja vključitve osnovnih okoljskih standardov v skupne ureditve trgov sklicuje na pet direktiv (glej tabelo 1) in zahteva, da države članice določijo operativne zahteve, ki jih morajo kmetje spoštovati.
At farm level, the audit found that:
Revizija je na ravni kmetij pokazala naslednje:
In Slovenia, the only requirement checked for most farmers in respect of the two Directives aiming to protect birds and habitats is that they do not have criminal convictions for offences against certain legal provisions. ere are no requirements concerning farming practices which may be harmful for birds or habitats.
V Sloveniji se pri večini kmetov glede dveh direktiv za zaščito ptic in habitatov preverja samo zahteva, da kmetje niso bili kazensko obsojeni zaradi kršitve določenih zakonskih določb. Glede načinov kmetovanja, ki bi lahko škodili pticam ali habitatom, ni nobenih zahtev.
In France, for the Directive aiming to protect the soil when sewage sludge is spread, the only requirement checked is the existence of a contract with the sludge provider articulating some formal provisions. e content of the sludge (e.g. the quantity of heavy metals) or the quality of the soil are not taken into consideration to define the requirement.
V Franciji se za direktivo, katere cilj je zaščita tal ob nanosu blata iz čistilnih naprav, preveri le zahteva o obstoju pogodbe z dobaviteljem blata, v kateri so navedene nekatere formalne določbe. Vsebnost blata (npr. količina težkih kovin) ali kakovost tal se pri določanju zahteve ne upoštevata.
In the Netherlands, the inspection body responsible for checking cross compliance requirements deriving from the Directive aiming to protect groundwater against pollution, decided that a visit to the farm was not necessary on the grounds that “the farm was connected to a sewage system”.
Na Nizozemskem je inšpekcijski organ, odgovoren za preverjanje zahtev navzkrižne skladnosti, ki izhajajo iz direktive za varstvo podzemne vode pred onesnaževanjem, sklenil, da obisk kmetije ni bil potreben, ker je bila „kmetija priključena na kanalizacijski sistem“.
Agricultural practices which may cause pollution were not checked.
Kmetijske prakse, ki lahko povzročijo onesnaženje, niso bile pregledane.
The determination of the scope of cross compliance by Council was not supported by relevant studies or other forms of documentary evidence from the Commission assessing action needed as well as potential difficulties.
Svet se pri določitvi obsega navzkrižne skladnosti ni oprl na ustrezne študije ali druge oblike dokumentarnih dokazov Komisije, v katerih bi bili ocenjeni potrebni ukrepi in možne težave.
Thus the Commission could not provide to the auditors documented justification of the reasons why certain SMRs or GAECstandardshadbeen included within cross compliance while others had not.
Zato Komisija revizorjem ni mogla zagotoviti dokumentiranih utemeljitev razlogov, zakaj so bili nekateri predpisane zahteveravnanjain standardi za dobre kmetijskein okoljske pogoje zajeti v navzkrižno skladnost, drugi pa ne.
For example, the initial proposals submitted by the Commission included a GAEC standard to “ensure balance of irrigation, drainage and water table replenishment”.
V začetnih predlogih Komisije je bil na primer tudi standard za dobre kmetijske in okoljske pogoje za „zagotovitev ravnovesja med namakanjem, odvodnjevanjem in obnavljanjem podzemne vode“.
Thisstandard was not retained, although it addressed one of the main environmentalproblemsin most Member States.
Ta standard ni bil ohranjen, čeprav se je nanašal na eno od glavnih okoljskihtežav v večini držav članic.
Furthermore, certain key issues, such as air pollution, were not even included in the initial proposals.
Poleg tega v začetnih predlogih sploh ni bilo nekaterih ključnih zadev, kot je onesnaževanje zraka.
Concerning the scope of GAEC, the Council Regulation stipulates that Member Statesshall ensurethat all agriculturalland, especiallyland whichis no longer usedfor production purposes,is maintainedin good agricultural and environmental condition.
Uredba Sveta glede obsega dobrih kmetijskih in okoljskih pogojev določa, da države članice zagotovijo, da se vsa kmetijska zemljišča, zlasti zemljišča, ki se ne uporabljajo več za proizvodne namene, obdelujejo v skladu s pravili za dobre kmetijske in okoljske pogoje.
However, a significant proportion of agricultural land is not subject to GAEC rules.
Vendar se pravila za dobre kmetijske in okoljske pogoje za precejšen del kmetijskih zemljišč ne uporabljajo.
Examples of such situations include small olive oil producers in Greece, horticulturists (who are in some areas amongst the heaviest polluters) in the Netherlands, and parcels in Austria held by Slovenian farmers residing in Slovenia and conversely.
Med takšne primere sodijo majhni pridelovalci oljčnega olja v Grčiji, vrtnarji (ki na nekaterih območjih sodijo med največje onesnaževalce) na Nizozemskemin parcelev Avstriji, ki jih imajo v Sloveniji živeči slovenski kmetje in obratno.
In each of these cases, farmers did not receive direct payments and the agricultural land was not controlledintheframework of cross compliance.
Kmetje v nobenem od teh primerov niso prejeli neposrednih plačilin kmetijskazemljišča niso bila kontrolirana v okviru navzkrižneskladnosti.
Regarding the objective of ensuring that agricultural land is maintained in good agricultural and environmental condition, the Council Regulation specifies the issues concerned (see Table 2) and requires the Member States to define operational standards which farmers have to respect. e audit revealed that, although Poland and the Netherlands defined some national standards, these standards could not be considered as sufficient to maintain all agricultural land in GAEC because either their scope or their nature was too limited.
V Uredbi Sveta so glede cilja zagotavljati obdelovanje kmetijskega zemljišča v skladu z dobrimi kmetijskimi in okoljskimi pogoji, podrobno navedena zadevna področja (glej tabelo 2), države članice pa morajo v skladu z Uredbo določiti operativne standarde, ki jih morajo kmetje spoštovati. Revizija je pokazala, da sta Poljska in Nizozemska sicer določili nekatere nacionalne standarde, vendar teh ni bilo mogoče šteti za zadostne za obdelovanje vseh kmetijskih zemljišč v skladu z dobrimi kmetijskimi in okoljskimi pogoji, ker so bili ali po obsegu ali po naravi preveč omejeni.
Regarding the objective of avoiding massive conversion of permanent pasture into arable land, the Commission adopted a number of measures in its Regulation.
Komisija je za cilj preprečevanja množičnega spreminjanja namembnosti obstoječih trajnih travnikov v orna zemljišča v svoji Uredbi sprejela številne ukrepe. Vendar je revizija pokazala, da na primer na Portugalskem več kot polovica obstoječih travniških površin, ki jih je zabeležil Eurostat, ni bila zajeta v navzkrižno skladnost (glej tudi odstavek 36).
Commission working document
Delovni dokument Komisije
Furthermore, the scope of the framework is rendered unclear by unresolved disagreements between the Commission and the Member States.
Poleg tega je obseg okvira za navzkrižno skladnost zaradi nerešenih nesoglasij med Komisijo in državami članicami nejasen.
For exam-ple,theframeworkfor GAEC annexedtothe Council Regulation consists of four “issues” (three related to soil preservation and one to land maintenance) which are detailed in eleven standards.
Okvir za dobre kmetijske in okoljske pogoje, ki so priloženi k Uredbi Sveta, na primer sestavljajo štiri „zadeve“(tri v zvezi z ohranjanjem talin ena v zvezi z vzdrževanjem zemljišč), ki so podrobno razčlenjene v enajstih standardih.
The Commission considers that Member States should define norms for the implementation of all 11 standards, except those not relevant to the national context.
Komisija meni, dabi morale države članice določiti norme za izvajanje vseh enajstih standardov, razen tistih, ki niso pomembni za nacionalni kontekst.
However, France and Portugal consider that such norms only need to be defined forthefour“issues” mentionedintheframework.
Vendar Francijain Portugalska menita, da bi bilotrebatakšne norme določitile zaštiri„zadeve“, omenjene v okviru.
Withrespectto SMRs, the audit revealed that the exact scope of the Regulation on food and feed law (see Table 1) was still not clear.
Glede predpisanihzahtevravnanja je revizija pokazala, da natančen obseg uredbe o zakonodaji o krmi in živilih(glejtabelo 1)še vedno ni biljasen.
For example, the Portuguese authoritiesandthe Commissiondisagreeon whichhygieneregulations should be checked as part of cross compliance.
Portugalski organi oblastise na primer ne strinjajo s Komisijo glede tega, katere uredbe o higieni bi bilo treba pregledati v okviru navzkrižne skladnosti.
The Commission specified in a working document4thatthree Regulations onfood andfeedlaw,in additiontotheone mentioned in Annex III to the Council Regulation, were part of cross compliance.
Komisijaje v delovnem dokumentu4 navedla, da so bile poleg uredbe, omenjene v Prilogi III k Uredbi Sveta, del navzkrižne skladnosti tudi tri uredbe o zakonodaji o krmi in živilih.
But Portugal considers that there is no legal basisfor adding to the requirements listed in Annex III.
Vendar Portugalska meni, da ni pravne podlage za dodajanje k zahtevam, navedenim v Prilogi III.
In contrast to the above examples, the audit also identified a small number of cases where obligations imposed on farmers under cross compliance were designed to produce positive environmental results.
Za razliko od zgornjih primerov je bilo pri reviziji ugotovljenih tudi nekaj primerov, kjer so bile obveznosti, ki so bile v okviru navzkrižne skladnosti naložene kmetom, zasnovane za zagotavljanje za okolje ugodnih rezultatov.
Surveys identified that the GAEC standard defined by France, which requires farmers to leave unfertilised buffer strips of 5–10 metres width along watercourses, is a good way to prevent water pollution.
Pregledi so pokazali, da je standard za dobre kmetijske in okoljske pogoje, ki ga je določila Francija in ki zahteva, da kmetje ne gnojijo na 5 do 10-metrskem varnostnem območju ob vodotokih, dober način preprečevanja onesnaževanja voda.
– e standard applied in Greece for crop rotation aims to improve soil organic matter by requiring farmers to cultivate grain legumes and incorporate these into the soil on 20 % of the cultivated area of their farm each year.
Cilj standarda, ki se v Grčiji uporablja za kolobarjenje, je izboljšanje organske snovi v tleh, zato se od kmetov zahteva, da gojijo zrnate stročnice, ki jih vsako leto zaorjejo v tla na 20 % obdelovalnih površin na svoji kmetiji.
– e detailed and strict requirement for the application of animal fertilisers established by the Netherlands is one of the main factors which has contributed to a significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by agricultural activity.
Podrobna in stroga zahteva za nanos živalskih gnojil, ki jo je določila Nizozemska, je eden od glavnih dejavnikov, ki je prispeval k bistvenemu zmanjšanju emisij toplogrednih plinov zaradi kmetijske dejavnosti.
ONLY LIMITED RESULTS CAN BE EXPECTED AT FARM LEVEL
NA RAVNI KMETIJ JE MOGOČE PRIČAKOVATI LE OMEJENE REZULTATE
The objective of the Council Regulation is “to incorporate basic standards into the common market organisations”.
Cilj Uredbe Sveta je „vključiti osnovne standarde v skupne ureditve trgov“.
However, SMRs and in many cases also standardsfor GAEC, are derivedfrom pre-existinglegislation which may have beenin placefor alongtime.
Vendar predpisane zahteve ravnanja in v številnih primerih tudi standardi za dobre kmetijske in okoljske pogoje izhajajo iz že obstoječe zakonodaje, ki je lahko že precej stara.
Forinstance,the environmental SMRs are based on fivelegal acts (see Table 1) which wereintroducedin 1979, 1980, 1986, 1991 and 1992.
Predpisane zahteve ravnanja za okolje na primertemeljijo na petih pravnih aktih(glejtabelo 1), ki so bili uvedeni v letih 1979, 1980, 1986, 1991 in 1992.
In cases where national legislation sets higherstandards,the Commission hasclarifiedina working document5that cross complianceshould be based onthelower EUstandards.
Komisija je v delovnem dokumentu5pojasnila, da bi morala navzkrižna skladnost temeljiti na nižjih standardih EU, kadar nacionalna zakonodaja določa višjestandarde.
Consequently, at farm level, almost all obligations introduced under cross compliance policies were already included in existing usual practices.
Posledično so bile na ravni kmetij skoraj vse obveznosti, uvedene v okviru politik navzkrižneskladnosti,že del obstoječih običajnih praks.
For instance, in Portugal, around 75 % of the farmers receiving direct payments did not have to fulfil any cross compliance requirement to respect the environmental SMRs.
Na Portugalskem na primer približno 75 % kmetov, kiso prejemali neposredna plačila, ni bilotrebaizpolniti nobenezahteve navzkrižneskladnosti, da bi spoštovali predpisane zahteve ravnanja za okolje.
Their farming practices were thus not affected.
To pomeni, da to ni vplivalo na njihove načine kmetovanja.
More generally, the audit disclosed that farmers in the Member States audited were usually notrequiredto changetheir existing practices.
Revizija je na splošno pokazala, da kmetom v revidiranih državah članicah običajno ni bilo treba spreminjati svojih obstoječih praks.
For example, only one Member State visited (Greece) defined specific farming practices to protect colonies of wild fauna on agricultural parcels, e.g. by settingoutrequirementsfor mowing and grazing.
Le ena od obiskanih držav članic (Grčija) je na primer določila posebne načine kmetovanja za zaščito kolonij prostoživečih živalskih vrst na kmetijskih parcelah, npr.z določitvijozahtevza košnjoin pašo.
In France, a national environmental institute identified that limiting the tillage depth wasa change in farming practice which could improve soil structure.
V Francijije nacio-nalniinštitut za okolje ugotovil, daje bila omejitev globine obdelovanja zemlje sprememba v načinu kmetovanja, s katero bi bilo mogoče izboljšati strukturo tal.
However, the French authorities did notinclude this standard under cross compliance.
Vendar francoski organi oblasti tega standarda niso vključili v navzkrižnoskladnost.
An advisory bodyinthe Netherlands, whichincluded environmental organisations and representatives ofthefarmingsector, proposeda standard on crop rotation.
Svetovalni organ na Nizozemskem, v kateremso sodelovali okoljske organizacijein predstavniki kmetijskegasektorja,je predlagal standard za kolobarjenje.
This standard for GAEC was not included under crosscomplianceasthe Netherlands madethepolicychoicetoinclude onlystandards which were based on existing nationallegislation.
Ta standard za dobre kmetijske in okoljske pogoje ni bil vključen v navzkrižno skladnost, ker se je Nizozemska odločila, da bo v navzkrižno skladnost vključila le standarde, ki sotemeljili na obstoječi nacionalni zakonodaji.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK
IZVAJANJE PRAVNEGA OKVIRA
THE MEMBER STATESIMPLEMENTED REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS ONLY PARTIALLY
DRŽAVE ČLANICE SO LE DELNOIZVAJALE ZAHTEVEIN STANDARDE
The legal framework leaves the main responsibility for detailing the obli-gationstobecomplied withbyfarmerstothe Member States.
Pravni okvir državam članicam prepušča glavno odgovornost za podrobno določitevobveznosti,kijih morajo spoštovati kmetje. To je skladno s potrebo, da se splošna pravila prilagodijo specifičnemu stanju, ki ga predstavlja velika raznolikost kmetijskih območij.