natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Despite representing only 2 % of European farmland, Austria has absorbed 21 % of total AE spending in the European Union. 
Trots att sterrike bara har 2 % av EU:s jordbruksmark har landet tagit emot 21 % av de medel som anvnts fr miljprogrammen fr jordbruket.
8.12.2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 353/15 Utilised agricultural Member State area, as at 1995 Utilised agricultural area, as a percentage of EU total million ECU 1995 1996 1997 Expenditure, 1996 to 1997 million Ecu Total expenditure 1993 to 1997 million Ecu Expenditure as a Expenditure as a AE aid in ECU/ hectare, 1993 to 1997 Belgium 1337 Denmark 2727 1000213 2 0 2 3 6 5 11 3 16 877 10 110 513 160 464 4 26 140 100 0 0 2 Germany Greece Spain France Ireland Italy Luxembourg 127 37 123 223 0 0 0 8 14 16 Netherlands Portugal United Kingdom 1 999 49 89 37 63 EU-12 119 694 93 123 231 485 550 1 034 1 584 2 422 65 55 20 Austria Finland Sweden 3 425 2 192 3 060 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 541 0 257 0 43 260 801 135 391 83 126 801 391 126 21 10 3 28 13 4 234 179 41 EU-3 EU-15 Source: EAGGF Financial Reports, 1993 to 1997. 7 100 0 0 123 231 0 841 485 1 391 477 1 318 1 511 2 902 1 318 3 740 35 100 45 100 152 29 (1 000 ha) 1993 1994 percentage of EU total, 1993 to 1997 percentage of EU total, 1996 to 1997 17 157 3 465 25 230 28 267 4 325 14 685 67 73 106 0 0 19 3 925 16 449 0 12 10 7 39 40 20 26 8 677 128 370 13 3 20 22 3 11 0 2 3 13 232 263 495 2 9 10 33 39 72 119 148 267 43 98 141 005442369 410 00004 4 114812 20 0 23 0 3 14 4 12 0 1 4 3 0 17 0 2 9 5 14 0 1 3 2 6 51 3 4 18 37 32 33 13 36 6 Table 7 Expenditureonagri-environmentalmeasures,1993to1997 
7 0 0 0 841 477 100 123 231 485 1 391 1 511 1318 2 902 1318 3 740 35 45 152 100 100 29 3925 16 449 3 0 12 39 40 49 13 10 7 20 26 37 1993 1994 1996 1997 Tabell 7 Utgifter fr miljinsatser inom jordbruket 1993Đ97 Belgien133710002133002 Danmark 2727 2 0 2 3 6 5 11 16 0 0 6 877 23 17 51 10 0 0 3 110 3 2 4 513 14 9 18 160 4 5 37 464 12 14 32 Luxemburg 127000004440033 Tyskland 17157 Grekland 3465 13 37 123 223 232 263 495 3 00029 10 20 8 14 16 33 39 72 22 67 73 106 119 148 267 3 0 0 19 43 98 141 11 0 0 54 42 369 410 2 422 sterrike 342530005412608018012128234 8677 128 370
C 353/16 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 8.12.2000 Table 8 EAGGF expenditure on afforestation measures, 1993 to 1997 Member State Belgium Denmark Germany Greece Spain France Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Portugal United Kingdom EU-12 Austria Finland Sweden 1993 1994 1995 — 0,0 0,0 — 2,4 2,0 — 19,8 15,7 — 5,8 8,6 — 14,8 60,8 — 0,2 1,3 — 29,9 31,0 — 0,0 9,8 — 0,0 0,0 — 0,4 2,7 — 2,0 12,4 — 15,0 3,0 — 90,3 147,3 1996 1997 0,0 0,0 2,1 3,1 18,0 13,3 11,3 14,0 88,8 157,5 2,5 3,4 33,3 33,9 25,9 35,2 0,0 0,0 2,8 1,6 26,1 31,5 21,1 14,9 231,9 308,4 3,7 4,1 5,4 6,2 0,0 0,0 (million ECU) Total Percentage 0,0 0,0 9,6 1,2 66,8 8,4 39,7 5,0 321,9 40,3 7,5 0,9 128,1 16,0 70,9 8,9 0,0 0,0 7,5 0,9 72,0 9,0 54,1 6,8 778,1 97,3 9,9 1,2 11,6 1,5 0,0 0,0 — 0,0 — 0,0 — 0,0 2,1 0,0 0,0 EU-3 0,0 0,0 2,1 9,1 10,3 21,5 2,7 EU-15 0,2 90,3 149,4 241,0 318,7 799,6 100,0 Source: Twenty seventh EAGGF Financial report. 
C 353/16 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 8.12.2000 Medlemsstat 1993 Tabell 8 Utgifter frn EUGFJ fr beskogningsinsatser 1993Đ1997 1994 1995 1996 1997 Total (milj. ecu) i % Belgien Danmark TysklandŃ19,815,718,013,366,88,4 GreklandŃ5,88,611,314,039,75,0 Spanien Frankrike Irland Italien Luxemburg Nederlnderna Portugal Frenade kungariket EU 12 60,8 88,8 157,5 1,3 2,5 3,4 31,0 33,3 33,9 9,8 25,9 35,2 0,0 0,0 0,0 2,7 2,8 1,6 12,4 26,1 31,5 3,0 21,1 14,9 147,3 231,9 308,4 Ń Ń Ń 14,8 Ń 0,2 Ń 29,9 Ń 0,0 Ń 0,0 Ń 0,4 Ń 2,0 Ń 15,0 Ń 90,3 0,0 1,2 321,9 40,3 7,5 0,9 128,1 16,0 70,9 8,9 0,0 0,0 7,5 0,9 72,0 9,0 54,1 6,8 778,1 97,3 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 2,4 2,0 2,1 3,1 9,6 sterrikeŃ0,02,13,74,19,91,2 Finland Ń 0,0 0,0 Sverige Ń 0,0 0,0 Klla: EUGFJ:s 27:e ekonomiska rapport.
It follows that maintaining existing practices has become the main target of Community AE expenditure, rather than ameliorating environmentally damaging intensive practices. Although this constitutes a legal and regular use of funds under the AE Regulation, support for existing practices only delivers value for money if it can be demonstrated that the alternative to support would be discontinuation of such practices, i.e., abandonment of agricultural land or intensification. 
Fljaktligen har det frmsta mlet med gemenskapens utgifter fr miljprogrammen fr jordbruket varit att bibehlla befintliga metoder i stllet fr att frbttra intensiva metoder som r skadliga fr miljn. ven om detta stt att anvnda medel inom frordningen fr jordbruksprogrammen fr jordbruket r lagligt och i enlighet med bestmmelserna, ger std till befintliga metoder endast valuta fr pengarna om det kan visas att alternativet till std vore att metoderna i frga skulle verges, dvs. nedlggning av jordbruk eller intensifiering.
The Commission, however, approved programmes without demanding from Member States appropriate evidence of the existence of such risks. 
Kommissionen godknde dock programmen utan att begra tillfredsstllande bevis p att det fanns en sdan risk.
Given the importance which the 5EAP gave to combating the damages inflicted by intensive farming practices, the allocation of Community resources upon the basis of the ability and/or willingness of Member States to provide co-financing, rather than on the basis of an objective assessment of need, represents a fundamentally inefficient approach to aid distribution. 
Med hnsyn till att det femte tgrdsprogrammet lade s stor vikt vid att bekmpa de skador som orsakats av intensiva jordbruksmetoder, r en tilldelning av EU-medel som baseras p medlemsstaternas frmga och/eller vilja att satsa pengar p medfinansiering snarare n p en objektiv behovsvrdering ett i grunden ineffektivt stt att frdela stdmedel.
The Commission has since acknowledged (within the context of demanding improved evaluation of AE programmes) that what is required is ‘a more effective realisation of the goal of applying agri-environmental programmes throughout the territory of the European Union according to needs’ (1). 
Kommissionen har sedan dess (i samband med en begran om bttre utvrdering av miljprogrammen fr jordbruket) medgivit att Óvad som behvs r ett effektivare frverkligande av mlet att miljprogrammen fr jordbruket skall tillmpas i hela EU-omrdet utifrn behovÓ (1).
The principle of subsidiarity which is integral to Council Regulations (EEC) No 2078/92 and (1) Eurostat and European Commission, ‘Agriculture, Environment, Rural Development: Facts and Figures — A Challenge for Agriculture’, July 1999, chapter ‘Impact of agri-environment measures’, p. 
Sub-sidiaritetsprincipen, som ingr i rdets frordningar (EEG) nr 2078/ (1) Eurostat och Europeiska kommissionen, ÓAgriculture, Environment, Rural Development: Facts and Figures Đ A Challenge for AgricultureÓ, Juli 1999, kapitlet ÓNitrogen in AgricultureÓ, s.
8 of 8. 
8 av 8.
Meanwhile, the Commission has noted that, ‘only five Member States account for 86 % of the expenditure. 
Under tiden har kommissionen konstaterat att Ói dag svarar fem medlemsstater fr hela 86 % av utgifterna.
Biodiversity in these areas may come under increasing pressure’ (2). 
Det finns drfr en risk fr att den biologiska mngfalden i dessa omrden minskarÓ (2).
The new Regulation on rural development (Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999) is more precise on programme justification and on building strategies to cope with environmental problems caused by agriculture (3). 
Den nya frordningen om landsbygdsutveckling (rdets frordning (EG) nr 1257/1999) r tydligare vad gller motiveringen till programmet och utarbetandet av strategier fr att hantera miljproblem som orsakas av jordbruket (3).
Weaknesses in targeting have not only been geographical; the important environmental problem of agriculture-generated atmospheric pollution has not been tackled effectively. 
Svagheterna i frga om mlinriktning av tgrderna har inte varit enbart geografiska Đ jordbrukets bidrag till luftfroreningar, som r ett stort miljproblem, har inte tgrdats p ngot verkningsfullt stt.
Agriculture accounts for 9 % of total greenhouse gas emissions in Europe; it is the main source of methane (48 %) and nitrous oxide (52 %) emissions in the European Union (4). 
Jordbruket svarar fr 9 % av det totala utslppet av vxthusgaser i Europa; det r den viktigaste kllan till utslpp av metan (48 %) och dikvveoxid (52 %) i EU (4).
Agriculture also accounts (2) European Commission, COM(1999) 22 final, 27.1.1999, p. 
Jordbruket svarar (2) Europeiska kommissionen, KOM(1999) 22 slutlig, 27.1.1999, s.
(3) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, pp. 80 to 101. 
(3) EGT L 160, 26.6.1999, s. 80Đ101.
(4) Eurostat and European Commission, ‘Agriculture, Environment, Rural Development: Facts and Figures — A Challenge for Agriculture’, July 1999, chapter ‘Agriculture and climate change’, pp. 1 and 2 of 7. 
(4) Eurostat och Europeiska kommissionen, ÓAgriculture, Environment, Rural Development Facts and Figures Đ A Challenge for AgricultureÓ, Juli 1999, kapitlet ÓNitrogen in AgricultureÓ, s. 1Đ2 av 7.
8.12.2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 353/17 for 95 % of ammonia emissions in Europe, which contributes towards acidification (1). 
8.12.2000 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 353/17 ocks fr 95 % av ammoniakutslppen i Europa, vilka bidrar till frsurningen(1).
The 5EAP set aims for reducing this pollution, but Community action to achieve these is still pending. 
I tgrdsprogrammet uppstlldes ml fr att minska dessa froreningar, men inga gemenskapstgrder har nnu vidtagits fr att uppn dessa ml.
The Commission has noted, ‘while the agricultural contribution to air pollution is understood, no particular agri-environmental strategy has been established to counter the effect’ (2). 
Kommissionen har ocks konstaterat att Ótrots att det str klart att jordbruket bidrar till luftfroreningarna har man inte utarbetat ngon srskild strategi inom denna sektor fr att motverka de negativa effekternaÓ (2).
The effects of the Commission’s failure to conduct an analysis of the European Union’s most important environmental needs before launching implementation of the accompanying measures could have been partially corrected had the Commission given detailed guidance to Member States for designing their programmes. 
Fljderna av kommissionens underltenhet att ta reda p vilka de viktigaste miljbehoven i EU var innan man brjade genomfra de kompletterande tgrderna kunde ha blivit mindre allvarliga om kommissionen hade givit medlemsstaterna detaljerade anvisningar om hur de skulle utforma sina program.
The lack of priority given to environmental needs could also have been partially corrected had the Commission linked the approval of the programmes to the achievement of specific and substantial environmental benefits. 
Konsekvenserna av den otillrckliga prioriteringen av miljbehoven skulle ven p ett annat stt ha kunnat mildras, nmligen om kommissionen som villkor fr att godknna program hade krvt att specifika och ptagliga miljfrdelar skulle uppns.
This is evident from the Commission’s approval of the French ‘prime à l’herbe’ measure in 1993(4), which was given despite reservations expressed by Commission services because of the weak evidence justifying the measure (5). 
Detta framgr tydligt av kommissionens godknnande av den franska tgrden Óprime  lŐherbeÓ (4), som lmnades trots interna reservationer p grund av att det saknades underlag som motiverade tgrden (5).
However, certain weaknesses in this measure were addressed by a programme amendment in 1998. 
Vissa svagheter i denna tgrd tgrdades emellertid genom en ndring av programmet 1998.
Another example is the Finnish AF programme. 
Ett annat exempel r det finska beskogningsprogrammet.
Although the latter failed to respect this requirement, the Commission has taken no remedial action to secure compliance. 
Trotsatt myndigheterna inte uppfyllde detta villkor har inte kommissionen vidtagit ngra avhjlpande tgrder fr att se till att villkoren uppfylls.
A reason for the above weaknesses, which also negatively affected the performance of monitoring and controlling of the measures, is the AE unit’s inadequacy in human resources, both in quantitative and qualitative terms. 
En orsak till de ovannmnda bristerna, som har inverkat negativt ven p vervakningen och kontrollen av tgrderna, r de otillrckliga personalresurserna Đ svl kvantitativt som kvalitativt Đ inom den enhet som ansvarar fr miljprogrammen fr jordbruket.
The Commission failed to deploy enough of its staff to this area. 
Kommissionen avsatte inte tillrckligt mnga personer ur sin personal till enheten.
These problems were aggravated by the fact that the number of programmes to be dealt with turned out to be much higher than expected and that the programmes are very heterogeneous in terms of aims, administrative mechanisms, farming practices funded and costs. For example, some Member States’ programmes cover the entire national territory (e.g. Sweden), others cover administrative regions (e.g. Italy) or topographical zones such as individual river valleys (e.g. the United Kingdom). 
9. () Det mest betydande franska miljprogrammet fr jordbruket; Óprime au maintien des systmes dŐlevage extensifsÓ, erhller ver 75 % av de 5 medel som avsatts fr miljprogram i Frankrike. () Skrivelse frn GD XI (Milj) till GD VI (Jordbruk), 13.5.1993. visade sig att antalet program som skulle handlggas blev mycket strre n vntat och att programmen var mycket olikartade i frga om syften, frvaltningsmetoder, finansierade jordbruksmetoder och kostnader. Exempelvis har vissa medlemsstater program som tcker hela landet (t.ex. Sverige) medan andras omfattar enskilda administrativa regioner (t.ex.
The high number and diversity of programmes should have been anticipated by the Commission: the Council, in approving Regulation (EEC) No 2078/92, enacted a very flexible policy instrument, permitting Member States a high degree of autonomy to design programmes which are adaptable to the unique structure, systems and environmental conditions found at national, regional and local levels within each Member State. 
Det stora antalet program och deras olikartade karaktr r ngot som kommissionen borde ha rknat med. I frordning (EEG) nr 2078/92 antog rdet nmligen ett mycket flexibelt politiskt instrument som gav medlemsstaterna stort utrymme att utforma sina program p det stt som lmpade sig bst fr deras respektive strukturer, system och miljfrhllanden p nationell, regional och lokal niv.
Regulations (EEC) No 2078/92 and (EEC) No 2080/92 both anticipate that the Commission establish detailed implementing rules for agri-environment and afforestation. 
I bde frordning (EEG) nr 2078/92 och (EEG) nr 2080/92 sgs att kommissionen skall faststlla detaljerade regler fr genomfrandet av miljprogrammen fr jordbruket respektive beskogningsprogrammen.
Rules to assist Commission budgetary forecasting were established, but detailed rules for Member States, covering programme design, implementation, control and evaluation, were not introduced promptly by the Commission. 
Regler till std fr kommissionens budgetprognoser utarbetades, men kommissionen underlt att snabbt infra detaljerade regler fr medlemsstaterna betrffande utformning, genomfrande, kontroll och utvrdering av programmen.
The implementing regulation concerning agri-environment was not adopted until four years after the entry into force of the basic Council Regulation, by which time most Member State programmes had already been adopted and started to be implemented (6). 
D hade de flesta av medlemsstaternas program redan antagits och brjat genomfras (6).
In respect of afforestation, no implementing rules have so far been adopted by the Commission. 
Fr beskogningsprogrammen har kommissionen nnu inte antagit ngra genomfrandebestmmelser.
It should be mentioned that detailed requirements have been developed by the Commission, but these lack legislative force. 
Det br dock nmnas att kommissionen har utarbetat detaljerade krav; dessa krav r emellertid inte bindande.
This difference in Commission approach between AE and AF has created inconsistencies in Community policy implementation. 
Denna skillnad i tillvgagngsstt fr tgrderna inom miljprogrammen fr jordbruket och tgrderna inom beskogningsprogrammen har medfrt inkonsekvenser i genomfrandet av gemenskapens politik.
For example, in respect of AE, Member States must provide detailed evidence to support proposed programme aid rates; these specific rates are then approved by the Commission. 
Nr det gller miljprogrammen fr jordbruket mste medlemsstaterna exempelvis lgga fram detaljerade underlag till std fr de freslagna stdsatserna; de specifika stdsatserna godknns sedan av kommissionen.
By contrast, in respect of AF, such information is not demanded of national authorities; the Commission approves aid rate maxima, within which Member States are free to set aid rates, without need for Commission approval. 
Nr det gller beskogningsprogrammen dremot begr man ingen sdan information frn de nationella myndigheterna; kommissionen godknner maximiniver fr stdsatserna, inom vilka medlemsstaterna sjlva fr faststlla stdsatserna utan godknnande frn kommissionen.
With respect to staff requirements, the Commission underestimated the workload which the accompanying measures would generate for its own staff. 
Nr det gller personalbehoven underskattade kommissionen den arbetsbrda som de kompletterande tgrderna skulle medfra fr den egna personalen.
In particular, the staffing of the unit responsible for AE was based on the assumption that most Member States would submit only one draft programme for approval. 
Personalstyrkan inom enheten med ansvar fr miljprogrammen fr jordbruket grundades p antagandet att de flesta medlemsstaterna skulle lmna in ett enda programfrslag fr godknnande.
In fact most Member States proposed several zonal programmes, as well as ‘horizontal’ measures covering the entire national territory. 
I sjlva verket freslog de flesta medlemsstaterna svl flera omrdesprogram som vergripande program omfattande hela det nationella territoriet.
Many of these draft programmes were amended in response to Commission input and some were rejected as unsuitable for Community co-financing. 
Mnga av dessa programfrslag ndrades som ett svar p kommissionens kommentarer och vissa avvisades som olmpliga fr medfinansiering frn gemenskapen.
19). C 353/18 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 8.12.2000 failure to implement the Nitrates Directive. 
19. C 353/18 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 8.12.2000 grund av att Belgien inte genomfrt nitratdirektivet.
By late 1998 the Commission had approved a total of 158 programmes and more than 270 programme amendments, representing a total of over 2 500 distinct and in many cases complex measures. 
Mot slutet av 1998 hade kommissionen godknt sammanlagt 158 program och ver 270 ndringar av program, tillsammans motsvarande mer n 2 500 olika Đ och i mnga fall komplicerade Đ tgrder.
The problem of insufficient staffing has been exacerbated by the failure to fill vacancies promptly and to ensure adequate continuity of staff. 
Problemet med otillrcklig personalstyrka har frvrrats genom att man har misslyckats med att snabbt bestta vakanta tjnster och med att skra en tillrcklig personal-kontinuitet.
Of the 12 staff in the unit in October 1994 (working on a range of measures, as well as AE), only one remained by June 1996, and most of the replacement personnel have in their turn since been replaced. 
Av de tolv anstllda p enheten i oktober 1994 (som arbetade med en rad tgrder samt med miljprogrammen fr jordbruket) fanns bara en kvar i juni 1996; de flesta av dem som ersatt denna personal har i sin tur ersatts med andra.
Even the post of Head of Unit remained vacant between September 1997 and May 1998. 
Till och med tjnsten som enhetschef var vakant mellan september 1997 och maj 1998.
Only one of the unit’s officials has any professional training in agronomy, and none is trained in environmental matters. 
Bara en av enhetens tjnstemn har yrkesutbildning i agronomi, och ingen av dem har miljutbildning.
It is over 12 years since a specialist recruitment exercise for agronomists was undertaken by the Commission, and the unit has no access to specialist environmental expert recruitment. 
Det r ver tolv r sedan kommissionen senast anordnade specialistantagningar fr agronomer, och enheten har inga mjligheter att rekrytera miljspecialister.
It was not until 1997 that any consultancy resources were formally allocated to the unit; and the only relevant specialist training given to unit staff over the past five years has been two half-day courses in analytical techniques. 
Inte frrn 1997 anslogs konsultresurser formellt till enheten. Den enda relevanta specialutbildning som enhetens personal ftt under de senaste fem ren r tv halvdagskurser i analysteknik.
The implementation of the new Rural Development Regulation constitutes a yet further substantial increase in the Commission’s responsibilities; the resources needed to address this new workload have to be adequately quantified by the Commission. 
Genomfrandet av den nya frordningen om landsbygdsutveckling medfr en betydande ytterligare kning av kommissionens ansvarsuppgifter; kommissionen mste p ett tillfredsstllande stt kvantifiera vilka resurser som krvs fr att den skall klara denna nya arbetsbrda.
Member State planning 51. 
Medlemsstaternas planering 51.
The failure at Community level to allocate funds on the basis of environmental priorities has been widely replicated at national and regional levels within Member States. As the Commission has realised, the AE programmes have had ‘a notable lack of impact on intensive areas’ (1). Generally, funding is targeted neither to the zones of greatest environmental priority, nor to the agricultural activities which are most damaging to the environment. 
Liksom p gemenskapsniv har man i stor utstrckning ven p nationell och regional niv i medlemsstaterna misslyckats med att ansl medel utifrn miljprioriteringar. Ssom kommissionen har insett har Ómiljprogrammen fr jordbruket ftt en mrkbart bristfllig inverkan p omrden med intensiva metoderÓ (1). ver lag kan sgas att medelstilldelningen inte inriktats vare sig p de geografiska omrdena med hgst miljprioritet eller p de jordbruksaktiviteter som skadar miljn mest.
This is problematic in Germany, France, Italy, Finland, Portugal, Austria, Sweden and the United Kingdom (see Text box 1). 
Detta r ett problem i Tyskland, Frankrike, Italien, Finland, Portugal, sterrike, Sverige och Frenade kungariket (se textruta 1).
(1) European Commission (DG VI. 
(1) Europeiska kommissionen (GD VI.
125. 8.12.2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities Text box 1 In Germany, the national environment ministry recognises that the Land of North Rhine Westphalia, which accounts for 9 % of Germany’s farmland, has urgent AE needs because of intensive farm practices: but only 0,7 % of EU-AE funding paid in Germany is allocated to this region. 
128. 8.12.2000 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning Textruta 1 I Tyskland har det nationella miljministeriet erknt att delstaten Nordrhein-Westfalen, dr 9 % av landets jordbruksmark finns, har ett akut behov av miljprogram p grund av de intensiva jordbruksmetoder som anvnds dr, men endast 0,7 % av de EU-medel som satsats p miljprogram fr jordbruket i Tyskland har avsett den delstaten.
In Saxony, intensive farming is responsible for nitrate pollution and soil erosion, but few measures address the most polluting sector of Saxon agriculture, that is the large intensive livestock farms established by the former German Democratic Republic. 
I Sachsen har det intensiva jordbruket orsakat nitratfrorening och markerosion, men det finns f tgrder som rr den mest frorenande delen av det sachsiska jordbruket, nmligen de stora anlggningar fr intensiv boskapsuppfdning som fre detta sttyskland lt bygga.