type: wikipedia

text:
Hitra železnica je oblika javnega železniškega prevoza s hitrostmi nad 200 km/h.
 Običajno hitri vlaki vozijo z največjo hitrostjo med 250 km/h in 300 km/h. Čeprav je nov svetovni hitrostni rekord za vlak s kolesi dosegel francoski TGV marca 2007 z največjo hitrostjo skoraj 575 km/h (prejšnji rekord iz leta 1990 je podrl kar za 60 km/h), je poskusna japonska maglev garnitura dosegla leta 2003 hitrost 581 km/h.
 Definicija
 Zgodovina
 Železniški promet ima dolgo zgodovino in je vedno veljal za eno najpomembnejših vej prometa. Prva vlečna vozila so se pojavila pred 2000 leti, bila so lesena in na konjsko vprego, tiri pa so bili izklesani v kamen. V 18. stoletju so se pojavile prve železne tirnice, na začetku 19. stoletja pa prve parne lokomotive. Železniški promet je prevzel primat med transportnimi panogami in ga zadržal vse do izuma avtomobila in letala, nakar se je njegov pomen začel zmanjševati. Dizelske in električne lokomotive so po 2. svetovni vojni zamenjale paro kot pogonsko sredstvo v večini držav. V drugi polovici 20. stoletja pa sta Francija (TGV) in Japonska (Shinkansen) začeli razvijati tehnologijo hitrih vlakov. Francija zaradi prevelike obremenitve cestnega in letalskega prometa, Japonska pa zaradi olimpijskih iger v Tokiu leta 1964 in transportnih potreb zaradi gostote poseljenosti. Kasneje so se jim pridružile še Nemčija (ICE), Španija (AVE), Italija (Pendolino) in ostali. Danes to tehnologijo uporabljajo že skoraj vse razvitejše države. Poleg hitrih vlakov, ki vozijo na tirnicah pa so strokovnjaki razvijali tudi koncepte maglev hitrih vlakov (hitri vlaki na magnetnem polju).
 Zakaj hitri vlaki
 Pojem hitrih vlakov označuje tehnologijo vlakov in infrastrukture, ki omogočajo transport ljudi oz. blaga z velikimi hitrostmi. Za izpolnitev teh pogojev je treba imeti ustrezne vlake in ustrezno infrastrukturo. Tehnologija hitrih vlakov se je začela razvijati, ker obstoječ cestni in tudi letalski promet (ki sta takrat prevladala) več nista bila dovolj za potrebe velikih mest. Namen je bil povezati daljše razdalje z rednimi linijami hitrih vlakov, kar pa je v veliki meri zahtevalo gradnjo novih prog, prilagojenih hitrim vlakom. Namreč, da hitri vlaki pridejo do izraza morajo potovati po čim bolj ravni oz. ustaljeni poti. Proge morajo čim manj sprememb smeri v smislu ovinkov, za kar pa je v veliki meri potrebna gradnja številnih predorov, viaduktov itd. Presenetljivo je, da tehnologija hitrih vlakov dopušča več sprememb v višini kot ostali sistemi, saj so hitri vlaki veliko močnejši od ostalih.
 Hitri vlaki predstavljajo kvalitetno in visoko standardno panogo JPP-ja. Ker vlak potuje brez znatnih sprememb gibanja (razen ustavljanje pri postajah) je potovanje zelo mirno, kar
 pomeni da lahko potniki med potovanjem počnejo tudi drugega. Hitri vlaki praviloma nimajo zamud oz. so te zelo majhne (na Japonskem vlak povprečno zaostaja 2 minuti!). Ker so hitri vlaki namenjeni predvsem povezovanju večjih mest le ti vozijo zelo pogosto. Tudi cene kart so povečini sprejemljive (visoke cene imajo na Japonskem, a so vlaki kljub temu praviloma vedno polni).
 Hitri vlaki v Sloveniji
 Slovenija je v smislu tehnologije hitrih vlakov še zelo nerazvita država. Naše železnice premorejo 3 hitre vlake tipa Pendolino ETR 460, na Slovenskem znane kot ICS (Intercity Slovenia). ICS vozi na relaciji Maribor-Ljubljana od leta 2000. Vožnja traja približno 1h45min, kar je 25 min manj kot če bi se peljali z naslednjim najhitrejšim. Vlaki sami so zelo udobni; Imajo tri razrede: 2. razred, 2. razred plus in 1. razred. Vagoni so pri vsakem vlaku trije, prostora v njih pa je za okoli 160 potnikov.
 Problem slovenskih železnic tiči v infrastrukturi, saj imamo precej zastarane proge. Vlaki ICS so sicer zmožni voziti do 250 km/h, a zaradi slabih prog ne presežejo 145 km/h (pa še to za kratek čas mimo Zaloga pri Ljubljani). Rekordna hitrost, ki jo je vlak dosegel na slovenskih tirih sicer znaša 207 km/h, dosežena pa je bila na progi med Pragerskim in Mariborom, vendar vlaki na tem kosu proge lahko vozijo največ 120 km/h. Vzrok so pomanjkljivo zavarovani cestni prehodi čez železnico. Za večje hitrosti bo treba še precej modernizirati proge, predvsem pa močno zmanjšati število nivojskih prehodov s cesto in odpraviti marsikatere ostre ovinke.
 Ciljna področja za hitro železnico
 Hitri vlaki
 TGV - francoski hitri vlaki - TGV (Train à Grande Vitesse, francosko za 'hitri vlak').
 AGV
 ICE 3
 Šinkansen
 Maglev
 Seznam hitrih vlakov
 Zunanje povezave
 Hitri vlaki
 S hitrimi vlaki proti letalskim prevoznikom
 Vrste železnic


text:
Modh iontrála leictreonach do chóras SMS na dteileafón póca is ea an tuarthéacs nó téacsáil thuarthach, a cheadaíonn don úsáideoir teachtaireachtaí a scríobh go tapa trí na focail a thuar go huathoibríoch, seachas iad a scríobh amach go hiomlán.
 Is féidir leaganacha Gaelacha de seo a íoslódáil ón idirlíon agus bíonn an bogearra suiteáilte cheana féin ar chuid de ghutháin Samsung ó thús.
 Tagairtí
 Naisc sheachtracha
 Bogearra saor in aisce do théacsáil thuarthach Ghaelach ón gcomhlacht Maithú
 Bogearra saor in aisce do théacsáil thuarthach Ghaelach ó Vodafone
 Fóin Póca


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: US

text:
 209 Md. 201 (1956)
 120 A.2d 669
 HESLOP ET UX.
 v.
 DIEUDONNE
 [No. 71, October Term, 1955.]
 Court of Appeals of Maryland.
 Decided February 20, 1956.
 The cause was argued before BRUNE, C.J., and DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, HENDERSON and HAMMOND, JJ.
 Theodore L. Miazga, with whom were Miazga & Miazga on the brief, for the appellants.
 David Macdonald for the appellee.
 BRUNE, C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court.
 This is an appeal by the sellers of real estate from a judgment in favor of a real estate broker for commissions on the sale. The appellants, Theodore A. Heslop and Edna G. Heslop, his wife, owned a residence in Silver Spring, Maryland. In April, 1954, Theodore A. Heslop gave an exclusive listing of the property for sale to Ripley & Romer, Inc., a member of the Montgomery County Real Estate Board, at a price of $19,950. The appellee, being a broker and a member of that Board, was notified of the listing. After the exclusive listing had expired he got in touch with the appellants and obtained permission from one or both of them to show the house, and agents of the appellee did show it on different occasions over a period of about two months to several prospective purchasers. The highest price offered by any of them was $18,000, but this offer was refused by the appellants. The appellants then advised the appellee *204 that the lowest price which they would accept would be $18,000 net to them.
 Shortly thereafter a Mrs. Jones, one of the eventual buyers, who wanted to buy a house, got in touch with Mr. Kendrick, one of the appellee's sales agents about the Heslop house. Mrs. Jones says that she got in touch with the appellee's office as a result of a newspaper advertisement; Mr. Kendrick says that he telephoned her. In either event, action initiated by the appellee's office would seem to have first caused Mrs. Jones to become interested in this property. Mr. Kendrick informed the appellants that he had a prospective buyer, and asked permission to show the property to Mrs. Jones. Permission was given and Mrs. Jones was first shown the property by Mr. Kendrick on August 14, 1954. At this time the price was understood to be $18,900. The following day Mr. and Mrs. Jones, in the company of their daughter and a friend and the appellee's agent, revisited the property and from there went to the office of the appellee to discuss possible terms on which the property could be bought. Mr. Jones testified that he made an offer of $18,750 while in the office, but that the appellee's agent, Mr. Kendrick, refused to submit the offer. Mr. Kendrick denied that such an offer was made and the trial court accepted his account of the discussion. Several days later Mr. Kendrick telephoned Mrs. Jones, and she had "lost interest." However, it later developed that not long after the last showing of the property by the appellee's agent, and on one or more other occasions, Mrs. or Mr. Jones, or both of them, without notifying the appellee, visited the property and had conferences with the appellants, one of which conferences took place on October 17, 1954. There was testimony that neither the Joneses nor the appellants were sure whether or not any commission would be payable to the appellee, and that in their conversation on October 17, 1954, Mr. Heslop stated that he would consult his lawyer to find out, and that Mrs. Jones said that if a commission was payable the Joneses would pay half of it. Finally, on October *205 18, 1954, Mr. and Mrs. Jones signed a contract with the appellants to purchase the property for $18,300.
 The appellee later learned that his prospects had purchased the property and brought this suit at law in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County to recover his commissions. Judge Anderson, sitting without a jury, found that the appellee was employed by appellants as a broker and that he was the procuring cause of the sale. He found that the appellee was entitled to a commission of $915.00, which is 5% of $18,300, and gave a judgment for that amount. This appeal is from that judgment.
 The appellants have raised what may be treated as four questions on this appeal.
 The first question (which the appellants divide into three parts) concerns evidence regarding an exclusive listing contract which was admitted over their objection. No recovery is sought under this agreement. It merely showed that the appellee was informed that the property was on the market and how he was informed of that fact. This exclusive listing had expired prior to any of the activity upon which the appellee's claim is based. If this evidence was improperly admitted, which we think it unnecessary to decide, its admission was at most harmless error.
 The second and third questions are these: (2) Was there sufficient proof of the appellee's employment and, if so, (3) was his right to a commission dependent upon the appellants' obtaining a stipulated net price for the property? The fourth question is this, if the appellee is entitled to any commission at all, is it more than $300, the amount by which the ultimate sale price exceeded the net price sought by the appellants?
 Code (1951), Article 2, Section 17, provides that: "Whenever, in the absence of special agreement to the contrary, a real estate broker employed to sell, buy, lease or otherwise negotiate real or leasehold estates * * * procures in good faith a purchaser * * * and the person so procured is accepted as such by the employer, and enters *206 into a valid, binding and enforceable written contract of sale, * * * in terms acceptable to the employer, and such contract is accepted by employer and signed by him, the broker shall be deemed to have earned the customary or agreed commission, as the case may be, whether or not the contract entered into be actually [carried] into effect, unless performance of such contract be prevented, hindered or delayed by any act of the broker."
 There was no written contract or express oral contract of employment of the appellee by the appellants, but it is claimed that there was conduct from which it could be found that a relationship of principal and agent existed between the parties. There need not be a written contract in order to have a binding agreement between the parties. When the appellee requested permission to show the property of the appellants to prospective purchasers, both parties obviously realized the type of relationship which was being created between them. There was a desire by the appellants to sell the property, and by allowing the appellee to show the property to various people they impliedly contracted to use the appellee as an agent for the purpose of that sale. In Heise & Bruns v. Goldman, 125 Md. 554, 94 A. 159, it was stated that, "The relation of principal and agent does not depend upon an express appointment and acceptance thereof, but it may be implied from the words and conduct of the parties and the circumstances." To the same effect is B. & O. Railroad v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Co., 138 Md. 604, at 611, 114 A. 730, in which it is stated that, "An agency may be implied from conduct and need not be proven by evidence of an express appointment." As these cases show, the existence of an agency relationship is a question of fact. We think that the evidence was sufficient to support the finding of the trial Judge that a relationship of principal and agent was created in the present case when the appellants agreed to allow the appellee to show the house to prospects, with a view to effecting a sale, even though there was no written or explicit oral agreement to that effect. We also think that it was properly found *207 that under this agency the appellants were obligated to pay the customary commission in transactions involving the sale of real estate. Code (1951), Article 2, Section 17. Also, as was said in Weinreb v. Strauss, 80 A.2d 47, a District of Columbia case, "It is the general rule, in the absence of an express agreement as to compensation, that one who employs a broker impliedly agrees to pay him the usual and customary commission." It was stipulated at the trial that the customary commission in sales of this type of property in this locality was five per cent.
 In order for the appellee to recover his commission he must prove not only that he was employed by the appellants but also that he was the procuring cause of the sale. That he was the procuring cause is not challenged in this Court, and we shall therefore not discuss it at any length. The appellee brought the property to Mr. and Mrs. Jones' attention and took them to see it and discussed possible terms of sale and financing with them. It was through the efforts of the appellee and his office that the appellants came into contact with the buyers. Although the appellee did not actually participate in the final negotiations between the parties, his activity set forth above was sufficient to support the finding of the trial court that he was the procuring cause of the sale. Buchholz v. Gorsuch, 144 Md. 62, 122 A. 389; Claiborne v. Brophy, (C.C.A., 4th, Md.), 236 F. 190, 149 C.C.A. 380.
 Buchholz v. Gorsuch and Claiborne v. Brophy, above cited, and Jones v. Adler, 34 Md. 440, are, we think, all directly in point on the broker's right to commissions where the seller closes a sale with a purchaser produced by the broker, without the broker's knowledge of, or participation in, the final negotiations, and at a price less than that at which the broker has been authorized to sell the property. Each of these cases supports the broker's right to a commission, and they are, we think, controlling in the present case.
 In Buchholz v. Gorsuch, supra, the sellers requested a real estate broker to list their property for sale on a five *208 per cent commission basis. After advertising for some time the broker brought the property to the attention of the eventual purchasers, who then inspected it. About three months later the purchasers approached the sellers and they agreed on a final price which was less than the original figure given to the broker. This Court, in upholding a judgment for the appellee-broker, said, "That prerequisite to recovery [that the broker be the procuring cause of the sale] is satisfied if the testimony admits of the inference that the sale was accomplished as a result of the appellee's action in discovering the purchasers, showing them the property, and referring them to the appellants for further negotiations. The fact that the sale was effected by direct agreement of the vendors and vendees does not disentitle the appellee to commissions if his efforts may fairly be regarded as the procuring cause of that result."
 In Claiborne v. Brophy, supra, the seller had written a letter to the plaintiff, a real estate broker, asking the broker to sell his business for him and offered the broker a commission of five per cent if he should find a purchaser at a certain specified price. The plaintiff in that situation got in touch with a prospective purchaser and wrote to the defendant about it. Subsequently the prospective buyer had the business inspected and later he and the defendant got together and consummated the sale between themselves at a price lower than that which the defendant had told the plaintiff he would accept. The defendant refused to pay the broker a commission, but the Court held that, "It is well settled that where one who [sic] has employed another to secure a purchaser for his property he cannot avail himself of the services of the agent and make the sale of the property by virtue of the information that he has received from the agent and thereby deprive the agent of his commissions. It is insisted by defendant that, inasmuch as this property was sold for a less sum than the price named to the plaintiff, the plaintiff is thereby barred from recovering anything for his services. The fact that this property *209 was sold for a less sum than the amount named to the plaintiff cannot affect the plaintiff's right to recover. One who has employed an agent to sell his property at a fixed sum, and on account of financial stress or otherwise takes the matter into his own hands and sells the property at a less price, cannot thereby avoid the obligations he is under to pay plaintiff a commission."
 In Jones v. Adler, 34 Md. 440, the appellee was employed on a commission basis to sell certain property at $16,000. Later, however, the house was sold for $14,000 to purchasers introduced by the appellee. The appellee sued to recover his broker's commission, but the appellant claimed that because the sale was below the original price no commission was payable. The Court said: "Where there is a special contract by the terms of which the broker is not to be paid commissions unless he sells the property at a specified price, the sale by him at such a price is a condition precedent to his right of compensation, unless pending the negotiations, and whilst his agency remains unrevoked, the owner consents to a sale for a sum other than originally agreed upon."
 A similar statement is made in Blake v. Stump, 73 Md. 160, at 169-170, 20 A. 788, at 790, which cites and relies upon Jones v. Adler, supra. In Jones v. Adler, the Court went on to say, "It is well settled, if the agent introduces or discloses the name of the purchaser, and such introduction or disclosure is the foundation upon which negotiations are begun and the sale effected, he will be entitled to commissions, and this too although in point of fact the sale may have been made by the owner. In other words, he cannot avail himself of the services, and by making a sale through information derived from the agent, deprive the latter of his commissions."
 Applying that rule to this case, we hold that the property owners may not employ a broker to sell their property, and after obtaining potential purchasers through the broker, deal privately with the purchasers so as to cut off the broker's commission by consummating a sale at a price lower than that at which they have authorized *210 the broker to sell; and that the broker is entitled to the full customary commission and not merely $300.00.
 The judgment of the Circuit Court will therefore be affirmed.
 Judgment affirmed, with costs.


type: contracts

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 22003D0221
 2003/221/CE: Decisione n. 1/CE/2002, del 14 febbraio 2003, del Comitato misto istituito ai sensi dell'accordo sul reciproco riconoscimento tra la Comunità europea e il Giappone, relativa all'approvazione di un organismo di valutazione della conformità ai sensi dell'allegato settoriale relativo alle apparecchiature terminali di telecomunicazione e alle apparecchiature radio
 Gazzetta ufficiale n. L 082 del 29/03/2003 pag. 0043 - 0044
 Decisione n. 1/CE/2002del 14 febbraio 2003del Comitato misto istituito ai sensi dell'accordo sul reciproco riconoscimento tra la Comunità europea e il Giappone, relativa all'approvazione di un organismo di valutazione della conformità ai sensi dell'allegato settoriale relativo alle apparecchiature terminali di telecomunicazione e alle apparecchiature radio(2003/221/CE)IL COMITATO MISTO,visto l'accordo sul riconoscimento reciproco concluso tra il Giappone e la Comunità europea, in particolare l'articolo 8, paragrafo 3, lettera a), e l'articolo 9, paragrafo 1, lettera b),considerando che spetta al Comitato misto decidere se inserire uno o più organismi di valutazione della conformità in un allegato settoriale,DECIDE:1. L'organismo di valutazione della conformità indicato in appresso è approvato, ai sensi dell'allegato settoriale sulle apparecchiature terminali di telecomunicazione e apparecchiature radio dell'accordo, per i prodotti e le procedure di valutazione della conformità di seguito indicati.Nome, acronimo ed estremi delle persone da contattare dell'organismo di valutazione della conformità Nome: TELEFICATION BV Tel. (31) 316 583 160 Fax: (31) 316 583 189 E-mail: info@telefication.com Indirizzo: Edisonstraat 12A, 6902 PK Zevenaar, Paesi BassiIndirizzo postale: PO Box 60004, 6800 JA Arnhem, Paesi BassiSito web: http://www.telefication.com Persona di riferimento all'interno dell'organismo: Dr.ir. Wouter B.A. Blom, Amministratore delegato.Prodotti e procedure di valutazione della conformità coperti dall'approvazioneApparecchiature di telecomunicazione:1) Organismo di certificazione designato per:Apparecchiature terminali per la telefonia (tutte le apparecchiature)Apparecchiature terminali diverse da quelle per la telefonia (tutte le apparecchiature)2) Ispettore abilitato per:Ispezioni di tipo I (tutte le apparecchiature)Ispezioni di tipo IIApparecchiature terminali connesse alla rete telefonica analogica (tutte le apparecchiature)Apparecchiature terminali connesse alla rete digitale di servizi integrati (ISDN) (tutte le apparecchiature)Apparecchiature terminali connesse ai circuiti affittati o ai sistemi di trasmissione dei dati digitali (tutte le apparecchiature)Ispezioni di tipo IIIApparecchiature terminali connesse alla rete telefonica mobile (tutte le apparecchiature)Apparecchiature terminali connesse ai sistemi di radioavviso (tutte le apparecchiature)Apparecchiature radio:1) Organismo di certificazione designato per:Apparecchiature radio specificate di tipo I (tutte le apparecchiature)Apparecchiature radio specificate di tipo II (tutte le apparecchiature)Apparecchiature radio specificate di tipo III (tutte le apparecchiature)2) Ispettore abilitato per:Apparecchiature radio specificate di tipo I (tutte le apparecchiature)Apparecchiature radio specificate di tipo II (tutte le apparecchiature)Apparecchiature radio specificate di tipo III (tutte le apparecchiature).2. La presente decisione, redatta in duplice esemplare, è firmata dai copresidenti. La decisione diviene effettiva alla data dell'ultima di dette firme.Firmato a Tokyo, il 14 febbraio 2003.A nome del GiapponeJun ShimmiFirmato a Bruxelles, il 13 novembre 2002.A nome della Comunità europeaJoanna Kioussi


type: legislation

text:
 30.4.2014
 NL
 Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie
 L 128/68
 UITVOERINGSVERORDENING (EU) Nr. 438/2014 VAN DE COMMISSIE
 van 29 april 2014
 tot goedkeuring van cyproconazool als bestaande werkzame stof voor gebruik in biociden voor productsoort 8
 (Voor de EER relevante tekst)
 DE EUROPESE COMMISSIE,
 Gezien het Verdrag betreffende de werking van de Europese Unie,
 Gezien Verordening (EU) nr. 528/2012 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 22 mei 2012 betreffende het op de markt aanbieden en het gebruik van biociden (1), en met name artikel 89, lid 1, derde alinea,
 Overwegende hetgeen volgt:
 (1)
 In Verordening (EG) nr. 1451/2007 van de Commissie (2) is een lijst vastgesteld van werkzame stoffen die met het oog op een mogelijke opneming daarvan in bijlage I, IA of IB bij Richtlijn 98/8/EG van het Europees Parlement en de Raad (3) dienen te worden beoordeeld. Cyproconazool is in die lijst opgenomen.
 (2)
 Cyproconazool is overeenkomstig artikel 11, lid 2, van Richtlijn 98/8/EG beoordeeld voor gebruik in productsoort 8 (houtconserveringsmiddelen), zoals gedefinieerd in bijlage V bij die richtlijn, wat overeenstemt met productsoort 8 zoals gedefinieerd in bijlage V bij Verordening (EU) nr. 528/2012.
 (3)
 Ierland is als rapporterende lidstaat aangewezen en heeft het verslag van de bevoegde instantie samen met een aanbeveling overeenkomstig artikel 14, leden 4 en 6, van Verordening (EG) nr. 1451/2007 op 30 mei 2012 bij de Commissie ingediend.
 (4)
 Het verslag van de bevoegde instantie is door de lidstaten en de Commissie getoetst. Overeenkomstig artikel 15, lid 4, van Verordening (EG) nr. 1451/2007 zijn de conclusies van de toetsing opgenomen in een beoordelingsverslag dat op 13 maart 2014 door het Permanent Comité voor biociden is onderzocht.
 (5)
 Volgens dat beoordelingsverslag mag van biociden die worden gebruikt voor productsoort 8 en die cyproconazool bevatten, worden aangenomen dat ze aan de eisen van artikel 5 van Richtlijn 98/8/EG voldoen, mits aan de bepaalde specificaties en voorwaarden voor het gebruik ervan is voldaan.
 (6)
 Bijgevolg moet cyproconazool worden goedgekeurd voor gebruik in biociden voor de productsoort 8, mits aan die specificaties en voorwaarden wordt voldaan.
 (7)
 Aangezien de evaluatie geen nanomaterialen betrof, mag de goedkeuring krachtens artikel 4, lid 4, van Verordening (EU) nr. 528/2012 geen betrekking hebben op dergelijke materialen.
 (8)
 De conclusie van het verslag luidt dat cyproconazool voldoet aan de criteria om te worden ingedeeld als giftig voor de voortplanting categorie 1B overeenkomstig Verordening (EG) nr. 1272/2008 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad (4), en als zeer persistent (zP) en toxisch (T) overeenkomstig bijlage XIII bij Verordening (EG) nr. 1907/2006. Hoewel de bestaande geharmoniseerde indeling van cyproconazool moet worden herzien overeenkomstig artikel 37 van Verordening (EG) nr. 1272/2008, moeten die intrinsieke eigenschappen in aanmerking worden genomen bij het vaststellen van de erkenningsperiode.
 (9)
 Aangezien niet aan de voorwaarden van artikel 90, lid 2, eerste alinea, van Verordening (EU) nr. 528/2012 is voldaan, moet de huidige praktijk in het kader van Richtlijn 98/8/EG worden voortgezet. De periode van goedkeuring moet daarom vijf jaar bedragen.
 (10)
 Met het oog op de toelating van producten overeenkomstig artikel 23 van Verordening (EU) nr. 528/2012 wordt cyproconazool echter geacht in aanmerking te komen voor vervanging overeenkomstig artikel 10, lid 1, onder a) en d), van die verordening.
 (11)
 Er dient een redelijke periode te verstrijken voordat een werkzame stof wordt goedgekeurd om de betrokken partijen de gelegenheid te geven de nodige voorbereidende maatregelen te nemen om aan de nieuwe vastgestelde eisen te voldoen.
 (12)
 De in deze verordening vervatte maatregelen zijn in overeenstemming met het advies van het Permanent Comité voor biociden,
 HEEFT DE VOLGENDE VERORDENING VASTGESTELD:
 Artikel 1
 Cyproconazool wordt goedgekeurd als werkzame stof voor gebruik in biociden voor productsoort 8, onder voorbehoud van de naleving van de in de bijlage vastgestelde specificaties en voorwaarden.
 Artikel 2
 Deze verordening treedt in werking op de twintigste dag na die van de bekendmaking ervan in het Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie.
 Deze verordening is verbindend in al haar onderdelen en is rechtstreeks toepasselijk in elke lidstaat.
 Gedaan te Brussel, 29 april 2014.
 Voor de Commissie
 De voorzitter
 José Manuel BARROSO
 (1) PB L 167 van 27.6.2012, blz. 1.
 (2) Verordening (EG) nr. 1451/2007 van de Commissie van 4 december 2007 betreffende de tweede fase van het in artikel 16, lid 2, van Richtlijn 98/8/EG van het Europees Parlement en de Raad betreffende het op de markt brengen van biociden bedoelde tienjarige werkprogramma (PB L 325 van 11.12.2007, blz. 3).
 (3) Richtlijn 98/8/EG van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 16 februari 1998 betreffende het op de markt brengen van biociden (PB L 123 van 24.4.1998, blz. 1).
 (4) Verordening (EG) nr. 1272/2008 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 16 december 2008 betreffende de indeling, etikettering en verpakking van stoffen en mengsels tot wijziging en intrekking van de Richtlijnen 67/548/EEG en 1999/45/EG en tot wijziging van Verordening (EG) nr. 1907/2006 (PB L 353 van 31.12.2008, blz. 1).
 BIJLAGE
 Triviale naam
 IUPAC-naam
 Identificatienummers
 Minimale zuiver-heidsgraad van de werkzame stof (1)
 Datum van goedkeuring
 Datum van het verstrijken van de goed-keuring
 Product-soort
 Bijzondere voorwaarden (2)
 Cyproconazool
 IUPAC-naam:
 (2RS,3RS;2RS,3SR)-2-(4-chloorfenyl)-3-cyclopropyl-1-(1H-1,2,4-triazool-1-yl)butaan-2-ol
 EG-nummer: N.v.t.
 CAS-nr.: 94361-06-5
 Cyproconazool heeft twee diastereomeren.
 Diastereomeer A: enantiomeer paar waarbij de 2-hydroxygroep en het 3-hydrogeen zich aan dezelfde zijde bevinden (2S, 3S en 2R, 3R).
 Diastereomeer B: enantiomeer paar waarbij de 2-hydroxygroep en het 3-hydrogeen zich aan tegengestelde zijden bevinden (2S, 3S en 2R, 3R).
 Technisch cyproconazool is een mengsel van ongeveer 1:1 van de twee diasteriomeren, die elk een mengsel van exact 1:1 van de enantiomeren zijn.
 940 g/kg
 Cyproconazool heeft twee diastereomeren.
 (Diastereoisomeer A: 430-500 g/kg
 Diastereoisomeer B: 470-500 g/kg).
 1 november 2015
 31 oktober 2020
 8
 Cyproconazool komt in aanmerking voor vervanging overeenkomstig artikel 10, lid 1, onder a) en d), van Verordening (EU) nr. 528/2012.
 Bij de evaluatie van het product moet bijzondere aandacht worden besteed aan de blootstellingen, de risico's en de doeltreffendheid voor elk gebruik waarvoor toelating werd aangevraagd, maar dat geen voorwerp was van de risicobeoordeling van de werkzame stof op het niveau van de Unie.
 Aan de toelating worden de volgende voorwaarden verbonden:
 1)
 Voor industriële gebruikers moeten veilige operationele procedures en passende organisatorische maatregelen worden vastgesteld. Wanneer de blootstelling niet op andere manieren tot een aanvaardbaar niveau kan worden beperkt, moeten bij de toepassing van de producten passende persoonlijke beschermingsmiddelen worden gebruikt.
 2)
 De producten worden niet toegelaten voor industrieel gebruik door dubbele vacuum-impregnering, tenzij gegevens worden ingediend waaruit blijkt dat het product geen onaanvaardbare risico's oplevert, zo nodig door toepassing van passende beperkende maatregelen.
 3)
 Er moeten passende risicobeperkende maatregelen worden getroffen om de aquatische en bodemcompartimenten te beschermen. Meer in het bijzonder:
 a)
 Op de etiketten en in voorkomend geval op de veiligheidsinformatiebladen van toegelaten producten moet worden aangegeven dat industrieel aanbrengen van het product moet worden uitgevoerd binnen een afgesloten gebied of op een ondoordringbare harde ondergrond met afdamming, dat pas behandeld hout na de behandeling onder een afdak en/of op een ondoordringbare harde ondergrond moet worden opgeslagen om rechtstreekse verliezen naar de bodem of naar water te voorkomen en dat verliezen bij het aanbrengen van het product met het oog op hergebruik of verwijdering moeten worden opgevangen;
 b)
 er worden geen producten toegelaten voor de industriële behandeling van hout dat wordt blootgesteld aan verwering, noch voor de behandeling van hout dat wordt gebruikt voor constructies in de openlucht, tenzij gegevens worden ingediend waaruit blijkt dat het product geen onaanvaardbare risico's zal opleveren, zo nodig door passende risicobeperkende maatregelen te treffen.
 (1) De in deze kolom vermelde zuiverheid was de minimale zuiverheidsgraad van de werkzame stof die voor de overeenkomstig artikel 8 van Verordening (EU) nr. 528/2012 uitgevoerde beoordeling is gebruikt. De werkzame stof in het in de handel gebrachte product kan dezelfde of een andere zuiverheid hebben, voor zover bewezen is dat de werkzame stof technisch gelijkwaardig is aan de beoordeelde werkzame stof.
 (2) Met het oog op de toepassing van de gemeenschappelijke beginselen van bijlage VI bij Verordening (EU) nr. 528/2012 zijn de inhoud en de conclusies van de beoordelingsverslagen beschikbaar op de website van de Commissie: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/environment/biocides/index.htm.


text:
2021 2 25
 LT
 Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys
 L 67/65
 EEE JUNGTINIO KOMITETO SPRENDIMAS
 Nr. 169/2018
 2018 m. liepos 6 d.
 kuriuo iš dalies keičiamas EEE susitarimo 30 protokolas dėl konkrečių bendradarbiavimo statistikos srityje organizavimo nuostatų [2021/230]
 EEE JUNGTINIS KOMITETAS,
 atsižvelgdamas į Europos ekonominės erdvės susitarimą (toliau – EEE susitarimas), ypač į jo 98 straipsnį,
 kadangi:
 (1)
 2018–2020 m. EEE statistikos programa turėtų būti grindžiama Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentu (ES) Nr. 99/2013 (1) su naujausiais pakeitimais, padarytais 2017 m. spalio 25 d. Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentu (ES) 2017/1951, kuriuo iš dalies keičiamas Reglamentas (ES) Nr. 99/2013 dėl 2013–2017 m. Europos statistikos programos, pratęsiant jos galiojimą iki 2020 m. (2), ir į ją turėtų būti įtraukti tie programos elementai, kurie būtini visiems reikiamiems Europos ekonominės erdvės ekonominiams, socialiniams ir aplinkos aspektams aprašyti ir stebėti;
 (2)
 Reglamentas (ES) 2017/1951 turėtų būti įtrauktas į 30 protokolą siekiant užtikrinti, kad bendradarbiavimas būtų pratęstas iki 2020 m.;
 (3)
 todėl, norint nuo 2018 m. sausio 1 d. išplėsti bendradarbiavimą, reikėtų iš dalies pakeisti EEE susitarimo 30 protokolą,
 PRIĖMĖ ŠĮ SPRENDIMĄ:
 1 straipsnis
 EEE Susitarimo 30 protokolas iš dalies keičiamas taip:
 1.
 5 straipsnio pavadinime skaičius „2017“ pakeičiamas „2020“.
 2.
 5 straipsnio 1 dalis papildoma šia įtrauka:
 „—
 32017 R 1951: 2017 m. spalio 25 d. Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentu (ES) 2017/1951 (OL L 284, 2017 10 31, p. 1).“
 3.
 5 straipsnio 2 dalyje skaičiai „2013–2017“ ir žodžiai „2017 m. gruodžio 31 d.“ pakeičiami skaičiais „2013–2020“ ir žodžiais „2020 m. gruodžio 31 d.“
 4.
 5 straipsnio 3 dalyje skaičiai „2013–2017“ pakeičiami skaičiais „2013–2020“.
 5.
 5 straipsnio 4 dalies tekstas pakeičiamas taip:
 „Pagal Susitarimo 82 straipsnio 1 dalies a punktą ir prie jo pridėtus finansinius reglamentus ELPA valstybių finansinis įnašas sudaro 75 proc. 2013 m. Europos Sąjungos biudžeto 29 02 05 (2013–2017 m. Europos statistikos programa) ir 29 01 04 05 (Statistinės informacijos politika. Administracinio valdymo išlaidos) eilutėse nurodytos sumos ir 75 proc. 2014–2020 m. Europos Sąjungos biudžeto 29 02 01 (Kokybiškos statistinės informacijos teikimas, naujų Europos statistikos rengimo metodų įgyvendinimas ir partnerystės Europos statistikos sistemoje stiprinimas) ir 29 01 04 01 (Europos statistikos programos rėmimo išlaidos) eilutėse nurodytos sumos.“.
 2 straipsnis
 Šis sprendimas įsigalioja 2018 m. liepos 7 d., jei pateikti visi pranešimai pagal EEE susitarimo 103 straipsnio 1 dalį (*1).
 Jis taikomas nuo 2018 m. sausio 1 d.
 3 straipsnis
 Šis sprendimas skelbiamas Europos Sąjungos oficialiojo leidinio EEE skyriuje ir EEE priede.
 Priimta Briuselyje 2018 m. liepos 6 d.
 EEE jungtinio komiteto vardu
 Pirmininkė
 Oda Helen SLETNES
 (1) 2013 m. sausio 15 d. Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentas (ES) Nr. 99/2013 dėl 2013–2017 m. Europos statistikos programos (OL L 39, 2013 2 9, p. 12).
 (2) OL L 284, 2017 10 31, p. 1.
 (*1) Konstitucinių reikalavimų nenurodyta.


text:
 18.1.2014
 PT
 Jornal Oficial da União Europeia
 C 15/6
 Pedido de decisão prejudicial apresentado pelo Centrale Raad van Beroep (Países Baixos) em 17 de outubro de 2013 — Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank/E. Fischer-Lintjens
 (Processo C-543/13)
 2014/C 15/07
 Língua do processo: neerlandês
 Órgão jurisdicional de reenvio
 Centrale Raad van Beroep
 Partes no processo principal
 Recorrente: Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank
 Recorrida: E. Fischer-Lintjens
 Questões prejudiciais
 1.
 Deve o conceito de «devidas», na aceção dos artigos 27.o e seguintes do Regulamento (CEE) n.o 1408/71 (1), ser interpretado no sentido de que, para a determinação do momento a partir do qual a pensão ou a renda é devida, é decisiva a data da decisão de atribuição no seguimento da qual a pensão é paga ou a data de início da pensão atribuída com efeitos retroativos?
 2.
 Caso o conceito de «devidas» se refira à data de início da pensão atribuída com efeitos retroativos:
 Pode isso ser conciliado com o facto de que o titular da pensão abrangida pelo artigo 27.o do Regulamento (CEE) n.o 1408/71, não pode, por força da legislação neerlandesa, subscrever um seguro de saúde com os mesmos efeitos retroativos?
 (1) Regulamento (CEE) n.o 1408/71 do Conselho, de 14 de junho de 1971, relativo à aplicação dos regimes de segurança social aos trabalhadores assalariados e aos membros da sua família que se deslocam no interior da Comunidade (JO L 149, p. 2; EE 05 F1 p. 98).


text:
 19.12.2015
 DE
 Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union
 L 333/150
 EMPFEHLUNG (EU) 2015/2419
 vom 16. März 2015
 für die Umsetzung der Assoziierungsagenda EU-Ukraine
 DER ASSOZIATIONSRAT EU-UKRAINE —
 gestützt auf das Assoziierungsabkommen zwischen der Europäischen Union und der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft und ihren Mitgliedstaaten einerseits und der Ukraine andererseits, insbesondere auf Artikel 463,
 in Erwägung nachstehender Gründe:
 (1)
 Nach Artikel 463 des Assoziierungsabkommens zwischen der Europäischen Union und der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft und ihren Mitgliedstaaten einerseits und der Ukraine andererseits (1) (im Folgenden „Abkommen“) kann der Assoziationsrat geeignete Empfehlungen zur Erreichung der Ziele des Abkommens aussprechen.
 (2)
 Nach Artikel 476 des Abkommens treffen die Vertragsparteien alle allgemeinen oder besonderen Maßnahmen, die für die Erfüllung ihrer Verpflichtungen aus dem Abkommen erforderlich sind.
 (3)
 Bis zu seinem Inkrafttreten wird das Abkommen gemäß Beschluss 2014/295/EU des Rates (2), Beschluss 2014/668/EU des Rates (3) und Beschluss 2014/691/EU des Rates (4) vorläufig angewandt.
 (4)
 Die Vertragsparteien haben sich auf den Text der Assoziierungsagenda geeinigt, die darauf abzielt, durch die Schaffung eines praktischen Rahmens zur Realisierung der übergeordneten Ziele der politischen Assoziierung und wirtschaftlichen Integration die Umsetzung des Abkommens vorzubereiten und zu erleichtern.
 (5)
 Die Assoziierungsagenda dient einem doppelten Zweck, da sie sowohl konkrete Schritte für die Erfüllung der im Abkommen verankerten Verpflichtungen der Vertragsparteien vorsieht als auch einen umfassenden Rahmen für den weiteren Ausbau der Beziehungen zwischen der EU und der Ukraine bietet, was im Einklang mit den allgemeinen Zielen des Abkommens zu einem hohen Maß an wirtschaftlicher Integration und zur Vertiefung der politischen Zusammenarbeit führen soll —
 HAT FOLGENDE EMPFEHLUNG ERLASSEN:
 Einziger Artikel
 Der Assoziationsrat empfiehlt, dass die Vertragsparteien Assoziierungsagenda EU-Ukraine (5) umsetzen, soweit eine solche Umsetzung auf die Verwirklichung der Ziele des Assoziierungsabkommens zwischen der Europäischen Union und der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft und ihren Mitgliedstaaten einerseits und der Ukraine andererseits ausgerichtet ist.
 Geschehen zu Brüssel am 16. März 2015.
 Im Namen des Assoziationsrates
 Der Präsident
 A. YATSENYUK
 (1) ABl. L 161 vom 29.5.2014, S. 3.
 (2) Beschluss 2014/295/EU des Rates vom 17. März 2014 über die Unterzeichnung und die vorläufige Anwendung des Assoziierungsabkommens zwischen der Europäischen Union, der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft und ihren Mitgliedstaaten einerseits und der Ukraine andererseits im Namen der Europäischen Union hinsichtlich der Präambel, Artikel 1 und der Titel I, II und VII des Abkommen (ABl. L 161 vom 29.5.2014, S. 1).
 (3) Beschluss 2014/668/EU des Rates vom 23. Juni 2014 über die Unterzeichnung — im Namen der Europäischen Union — und die vorläufige Anwendung des Assoziierungsabkommens zwischen der Europäischen Union, der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft und ihren Mitgliedstaaten einerseits und der Ukraine andererseits hinsichtlich der Titel III (mit Ausnahme der Bestimmungen über die Behandlung von Drittstaatsangehörigen, die als Arbeitnehmer im Hoheitsgebiet der anderen Vertragspartei legal beschäftigt sind) und der Titel IV, V, VI und VII des Abkommens sowie der diesbezüglichen Anhänge und Protokolle (ABl. L 278 vom 20.9.2014, S. 1).
 (4) Beschluss 2014/691/EU des Rates vom 29. September 2014 zur Änderung des Beschlusses 2014/668/EU über die Unterzeichnung — im Namen der Europäischen Union — und die vorläufige Anwendung des Assoziierungsabkommens zwischen der Europäischen Union, der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft und ihren Mitgliedstaaten einerseits und der Ukraine andererseits hinsichtlich des Titels III (mit Ausnahme der Bestimmungen über die Behandlung von Drittstaatsangehörigen, die als Arbeitnehmer im Hoheitsgebiet der anderen Vertragspartei legal beschäftigt sind) und der Titel IV, V, VI und VII des Abkommens sowie der diesbezüglichen Anhänge und Protokolle (ABl. L 289 vom 3.10.2014, S. 1).
 (5) Siehe Dokument st 6978/15 auf http://register.consilium.europa.eu.


text:
Informatika (kompiuterija, , , , = „kompiuterių mokslas“, JAV – ) – mokslas bei technikos šaka, kuri nagrinėja informacijos apdorojimą bei jos saugojimą, panaudojant kompiuterius.
 Informatika (Informacinės technologijos) skatina intensyvų informacijos apsikeitimą tarptautiniu mastu. Praktikoje informatika apima tiek abstrakčius algoritmų, formalių gramatikų ir panašius tyrimus, tiek ir konkretesnes sritis – programavimo kalbas, programinę, techninę įrangą bei kompiuterio sudėtines dalis.
 Naudojant šį žodį junginyje su konkrečios disciplinos vardu (pvz., ekonominė informatika, bioinformatika ir panašiai) jis nurodo tam tikras informatikos specializacijas, kurios yra skirtos valdyti ir apdoroti duomenis, informaciją ir žinias atitinkamos disciplinos ir kartu įtraukia informatikos koncepcijas bei teorijas į šias disciplinas. Analogiškai informatika turi ryšių su bibliotekininkyste.
 Etimologija
 1957 m. vokiečių kompiuterių specialistas Karlas Šteinbuchas (, 1917–2005) panaudojo žodį Informatika () savo publikacijoje Informatika: Automatinis informacijos apdorojimas (, ). Lietuvių kalbos žodis Informatika () kartais savo reikšme yra tapatinamas su kompiuterių mokslu (). Tačiau „kompiuterių mokslas“ turi daugiau matematinę prasmę.
 Prancūzų žodį () 1962 m. pirmą kartą panaudojo Filipas Dreifas () kartu su vertimu į anglų kalbą () bei informatica (itališkų, ispaniškų, portugališkų, olandų kalbas), naudodamas jį, kalbant apie kompiuterių taikymus, skirtus saugoti ir apdoroti informacijai.
 Istorija
 Vystantis technikai, augant skaičiavimo operacijų apimčiai bei sudėtingėjant skaičiavimams ši informacijos apdorojimo sritis pradėjo varžyti žmones, todėl buvo palaipsniui vystoma skaičiavimo teorija ir technika.
 Jau antikiniais laikais egzistavo skaičiavimus palengvinančios priemonės tokios kaip abakas ar skaitliukai. XVI a. pabaigoje – XVII a. pradžioje buvo sukurti pirmieji mechaniniai skaičiavimo įrenginiai. Pirmąją mechaninę skaičiavimo mašiną, kuri galėjo atlikti sudėties ir atimties operacijas, 1623 m. sukonstravo Tiubingeno universiteto profesorius Vilhelmas Šikardas (, 1592–1635). Deja, ši mašina greitai sudegė. 1642 m. prancūzas Blezas Paskalis (, 1623–1662), būdamas 19 metų, sukonstravo sumavimo mašiną – aritmometro prototipą. Tarp 1837 ir 1901 m. Čarlzas Babidžas (, 1791–1871) – anglų matematikas ir išradėjas, padedant Adai Lovelasei (, 1815–1852), suprojektavo Skirtumų mašiną, kurią galima laikyti pirmuoju šiuolaikinių kompiuterių prototipu. Apie 1900, IBM pardavė pirmąsias perfokortines mašinas. Tačiau visos šios mašinos buvo sukurtos atlikti atskirus uždavinius arba, geriausiu atveju, jų tam tikrą aibę.
 Iki 1940 buvo sukurta ir kitų našesnių skaičiavimo mašinų, kurioms pavadinti buvo pradėta naudoti sąvoka kompiuteris (). Kadangi tuo metu tapo aišku, kad kompiuteriai gali būti naudojami matematiniams skaičiavimams atlikti, tai kompiuterių mokslas tapo platesnis nei bendrai skaičiavimas. Kompiuterių mokslas kaip atskira akademinė disciplina atsirado 1960.
 Toliau plečiantis kompiuterių panaudojimui ir su jais susijusių uždavinių ratui, kompiuterių mokslas buvo praplėstas teorinėmis disciplinomis ir galiausiai iš jo 1970 m. susiformavo ir buvo pripažinta informatika kaip atskira mokslo šaka. Iki tol informatika vystėsi matematikos, elektronikos ir kitų techninių disciplinų sudėtyje. Jos užuomazgų galima buvo rasti net ir lingvistikoje. Pirmasis informatikos fakultetas buvo įkurtas 1962 m. Pardų universitete.
 Šis naujas terminas buvo priimtas naudoti visoje Vakarų Europoje, išskyrus anglų kalboje, ir verčiant jo reikšmė atitinka ( arba ) žodžių reikšmę. Nors žodis () yra laikomas sąvokos () sinonimu.
 Pirmasis lietuviškas kompiuteris „EVP80-2 Rūta“ buvo sukurtas 1963 m. , vadovas Gintautas Grigas. Prof. Laimutis Telksnys šeštajame dešimtmetyje sukūrė pirmąją Lietuvoje elektroninę skaičiavimo mašiną, vėliau ir pirmąjį Europoje rašto ženklus skaitantį automatą „Rūta-701“, kuris atpažindavo bei nuskaitydavo ir ranka rašytus ženklus. Su komanda sukūrė sistemą „LIEPA“ – skaitmeninio lietuvių kalbos atpažinimo bei elektroninio teksto skaitytuvą lietuvių kalba . Lietuvoje informatikos terminas paplito nuo 1986 m., kai mokyklose atsirado toks kursas.
 Susiję mokslai/sritys
 Informatika yra glaudžiai susijusi su keletu sričių.
 Matematika
 Programavimas
 Programų inžinerija
 Informacijos vadyba
 Informacijos saugumas (įskaitant ir kriptografiją)
 Verslo informatika
 Taip pat skaitykite
 Informacijos matavimo vienetai
 Nuorodos


text:
 30.5.2015
 RO
 Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene
 L 134/1
 REGULAMENTUL DE PUNERE ÎN APLICARE (UE) 2015/840 AL COMISIEI
 din 29 mai 2015
 privind controalele efectuate de autoritățile responsabile în temeiul Regulamentului (UE) nr. 514/2014 al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului de stabilire a dispozițiilor generale privind Fondul pentru azil, migrație și integrare, precum și instrumentul de sprijin financiar pentru cooperarea polițienească, prevenirea și combaterea criminalității și gestionarea crizelor
 COMISIA EUROPEANĂ,
 având în vedere Tratatul privind funcționarea Uniunii Europene,
 având în vedere Regulamentul (UE) nr. 514/2014 al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului din 16 aprilie 2014 de stabilire a dispozițiilor generale privind Fondul pentru azil, migrație și integrare, precum și instrumentul de sprijin financiar pentru cooperarea polițienească, prevenirea și combaterea criminalității și gestionarea crizelor (1), în special articolul 27 alineatul (5),
 întrucât:
 (1)
 Autoritățile responsabile răspund de gestionarea și controlul cheltuielilor în temeiul Regulamentului (UE) nr. 514/2014. În acest scop, trebuie să efectueze controale administrative și controale la fața locului.
 (2)
 Controalele administrative eficiente efectuate de autoritățile responsabile ar trebui să consiste în primul rând din analizarea declarațiilor financiare transmise de către beneficiari. O verificare mai detaliată a documentelor justificative individuale ar trebui efectuată numai atunci când această analiză dezvăluie incoerențe sau nereguli. Pentru a garanta un nivel suficient de asigurare, reducând, în același timp, sarcina administrativă, este important, de asemenea, să se clarifice circumstanțele în care autoritatea responsabilă poate invoca un certificat de audit.
 (3)
 Controalele la fața locului ar trebui să cuprindă aspecte atât financiare, cât și operaționale și ar putea fi necesar ca acestea să fie realizate în diferite etape ale unui proiect. Prin urmare, este necesar să se stabilească domeniul de aplicare al fiecărui tip de controale la fața locului, pentru a se asigura că acestea sunt realizate în cel mai eficient mod.
 (4)
 Controalele operaționale la fața locului ar trebui să aibă loc în timpul punerii în aplicare a proiectelor, astfel încât să poată fi luate măsuri corective în timp util. Aceste controale ar trebui să se aplice atât unui eșantion de proiecte care sunt încă în desfășurare în prima zi a exercițiului financiar relevant, cât și unor proiecte care încep în cursul exercițiului financiar respectiv.
 (5)
 Cu scopul de a garanta un nivel suficient de asigurare, reducând, în același timp, sarcina administrativă, ar trebui definite circumstanțele în care riscul de eroare este considerat nesemnificativ și, prin urmare, numărul de controale financiare la fața locului poate fi redus. Cu toate acestea, este, de asemenea, necesar să se precizeze acțiunile care trebuie întreprinse în cazul în care există o rată semnificativă de eroare, în scopul de a obține o asigurare suficientă cu privire la legalitatea și regularitatea cheltuielilor Uniunii.
 (6)
 Ar trebui clarificate principalele elemente ale controalelor financiare la fața locului. În special, autoritățile responsabile trebuie să verifice caracterul nelucrativ al proiectelor sprijinite prin programele naționale. Autoritățile responsabile ar trebui să se asigure că aceste proiecte nu beneficiază de dublă finanțare a cheltuielilor în cadrul programelor naționale și al altor programe ale Uniunii, în ceea ce privește toate perioadele de programare, inclusiv finanțarea pusă la dispoziție de agenții.
 (7)
 Documentele justificative ar trebui păstrate o anumită perioadă după încheierea fiecărui proiect, pentru a permite autorităților responsabile, Comisiei (inclusiv OLAF) și Curții de Conturi Europene să își efectueze controalele.
 (8)
 Pentru a permite aplicarea prezentului regulament de îndată ce sunt aprobate programele naționale, acesta ar trebui să intre în vigoare în ziua următoare datei publicării în Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene.
 (9)
 Regatul Unit și Irlanda au obligații în temeiul Regulamentului (UE) nr. 514/2014 și sunt supuse, prin urmare, dispozițiilor prezentului regulament.
 (10)
 Fără a aduce atingere considerentului 47 din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 514/2014, Danemarca nu are obligații în temeiul Regulamentului (UE) nr. 514/2014 sau al prezentului regulament.
 (11)
 Măsurile prevăzute în prezentul regulament sunt conforme cu avizul Comitetului Fonduri pentru azil, migrație și integrare și pentru securitate internă,
 ADOPTĂ PREZENTUL REGULAMENT:
 Articolul 1
 Controalele administrative
 (1) Autoritatea responsabilă efectuează controale administrative cu privire la toate declarațiile financiare trimise de beneficiari cu scopul de a primi finanțare din partea Uniunii, în conformitate cu acordurile de grant definite la articolul 1 litera (d) din Regulamentul delegat (UE) nr. 1042/2014 al Comisiei (2) („declarațiile financiare”). Aceste controale includ cel puțin următoarele elemente:
 (a)
 verificări menite să confirme corectitudinea formală și exactitatea aritmetică a declarațiilor financiare;
 (b)
 verificări pentru a confirma că proiectul a atins obiectivele stabilite în acordul de grant sau că se fac progrese în ceea ce privește atingerea obiectivelor respective;
 (c)
 o examinare analitică pentru a evalua pertinența cheltuielilor declarate în declarațiile financiare și conformitatea acestor cheltuieli cu cerințele prevăzute în acordul de grant, precum și în normele Uniunii și normele naționale aplicabile.
 (2) În cazul în care controalele administrative dezvăluie incoerențe sau nereguli, autoritatea responsabilă efectuează verificări detaliate pentru a evalua legalitatea și regularitatea cheltuielilor, în special prin examinarea unui eșantion selectat de documente justificative.
 (3) Autoritatea responsabilă poate solicita beneficiarului să obțină un certificat de audit și un raport de audit care să cuprindă toate aspectele menționate la alineatul (1) literele (a) și (c) și care să fie emis de către un auditor independent. În acest caz, autoritatea responsabilă stabilește domeniul de aplicare al controalelor care urmează să fie efectuate de către auditorul independent, precum și modelul de raport de audit.
 Articolul 2
 Principiile generale privind controalele la fața locului
 Autoritatea responsabilă efectuează controale financiare și operaționale la fața locului.
 Controalele la fața locului sunt efectuate pe baza documentației și a evidențelor păstrate de beneficiarii proiectelor.
 În conformitate cu legislația națională pot fi efectuate controale neanunțate la fața locului în cazul în care nivelul de asigurare ar putea fi subminat în cazul unui aviz prealabil.
 Articolul 3
 Controalele financiare la fața locului
 (1) Controalele financiare la fața locului vizează furnizarea unui nivel suficient de asigurare cu privire la legalitatea și regularitatea operațiunilor și a contractelor care stau la baza declarațiilor financiare.
 (2) Autoritatea responsabilă verifică dacă:
 (a)
 cheltuielile în legătură cu declarațiile financiare corespund datelor din registrele contabile și din documentele justificative păstrate de beneficiarii proiectelor;
 (b)
 cheltuielile în legătură cu declarațiile financiare îndeplinesc cerințele de eligibilitate prevăzute în acordul de grant, precum și în normele Uniunii și normele naționale aplicabile;
 (c)
 sursele de finanțare respectă dispozițiile articolului 16 alineatul (2) din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 514/2014.
 (3) Fără a aduce atingere articolului 4 alineatul (2) din prezentul regulament, controalele financiare la fața locului acoperă cel puțin 10 % din valoarea cumulată a contribuției Uniunii la proiectele declarate ca fiind finalizate în conturile anuale menționate la articolul 39 din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 514/2014.
 Articolul 4
 Condițiile de reducere sau de intensificare a controalelor financiare la fața locului
 (1) Autoritatea responsabilă verifică nivelul ratei de eroare în contribuția Uniunii controlată în conturile anuale menționate la articolul 39 din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 514/2014 pentru exercițiul financiar N.
 (2) Autoritatea responsabilă poate reduce sfera de acoperire a controalelor financiare la fața locului în următorul exercițiu financiar N+1, în cazul în care sunt îndeplinite următoarele două condiții:
 (a)
 rata de eroare este mai mică de 2 % din contribuția Uniunii controlată în conturile anuale pentru exercițiul financiar N;
 (b)
 controalele financiare la fața locului, efectuate de la începutul programului național, acoperă cel puțin 10 % din valoarea cumulată a contribuției Uniunii la toate proiectele declarate ca fiind finalizate în conturile anuale de la începutul programului.
 (3) În cazul în care rata de eroare este mai mare de 2 % sau egală cu acest procent din contribuția Uniunii controlată în conturile anuale pentru exercițiul financiar N, autoritatea responsabilă analizează importanța acestei rate de eroare pentru a stabili amploarea și efectele erorilor și pentru a determina dacă rata de eroare este reprezentativă pentru întregul set de plăți declarate. Autoritatea responsabilă aplică măsurile preventive și corective necesare, inclusiv controale suplimentare, și prezintă rezultatele acestei analize în rezumatul anual menționat la articolul 59 alineatul (5) primul paragraf litera (b) din Regulamentul (UE, Euratom) nr. 966/2012 al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului (3).
 Controalele financiare la fața locului aferente exercițiului financiar următor (N+1) acoperă un procentaj din valoarea cumulată a contribuției Uniunii la proiectele declarate ca fiind finalizate în conturile anuale pentru exercițiul financiar N+1 care este mai ridicat decât procentajul corespunzător din exercițiul financiar N. Acest procentaj superior nu este mai mic de 10 %. În plus, până în exercițiul financiar N+1, controalele financiare la fața locului, efectuate de la începutul programului național, acoperă cel puțin 10 % din valoarea cumulată a contribuției Uniunii la toate proiectele declarate ca fiind finalizate în conturile anuale de la începutul programului.
 În cazul în care rata de eroare rezultată în urma controalelor intensificate efectuate în exercițiul N+1 este mai mică de 2 %, autoritatea responsabilă efectuează, în următorul exercițiu financiar (N+2), controale financiare la fața locului care acoperă cel puțin 10 % din valoarea cumulată a contribuției Uniunii la proiectele declarate ca fiind finalizate în conturile anuale pentru exercițiul financiar N+2.
 Articolul 5
 Controalele operaționale la fața locului
 (1) Atunci când efectuează controale operaționale la fața locului, autoritatea responsabilă verifică dacă proiectul în cauză este pus în aplicare în conformitate cu acordul de grant. În special, aceasta verifică dacă indicatorii raportați de beneficiari sunt fiabili și dacă proiectul se desfășoară fără întârzieri nejustificate.
 (2) Controalele operaționale la fața locului efectuate în exercițiul financiar N acoperă cel puțin 20 % din numărul proiectelor puse în aplicare în cursul exercițiului financiar respectiv, astfel cum sunt declarate în conturile anuale corespunzătoare, menționate la articolul 39 din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 514/2014.
 Articolul 6
 Metodologia de eșantionare pentru controalele la fața locului
 Autoritatea responsabilă efectuează controale la fața locului pe un eșantion de proiecte reprezentând o combinație adecvată de tipuri și dimensiuni de proiecte, operațiuni, beneficiari și moduri de punere în aplicare. Eșantionul ține seama de eventualii factori de risc, precum și de aspectele legate de raportul costuri-beneficii aferente controalelor.
 Articolul 7
 Rapoartele de control
 (1) Autoritatea responsabilă întocmește un raport privind fiecare control administrativ și fiecare control la fața locului, furnizând următoarele informații:
 (a)
 datele complete de identificare ale proiectului și ale acordului de grant corespunzător;
 (b)
 numele și semnătura persoanei care a efectuat controlul;
 (c)
 numele beneficiarului;
 (d)
 tipul controalelor (administrative, financiare sau operaționale la fața locului sau o combinație);
 (e)
 în cazul în care este necesar, domeniul de aplicare al controlului;
 (f)
 cheltuielile care intră în domeniul de aplicare al controlului și cheltuielile (eșantionul) verificat(e) efectiv;
 (g)
 valoarea cheltuielilor considerate neeligibile; precum și
 (h)
 o descriere a principalelor constatări, a deficiențelor, a erorilor și neregulilor, a controalelor și a analizelor suplimentare efectuate, a recomandărilor și măsurilor corective propuse, precum și a reacției beneficiarului.
 (2) Raportul de control poate fi prezentat sub forma unei liste de verificare.
 Articolul 8
 Condițiile specifice
 În cazul în care autoritatea responsabilă acționează ca organism executiv, astfel cum se menționează la articolul 8 din Regulamentul delegat (UE) nr. 1042/2014, controalele administrative și controalele la fața locului menționate la articolele 1 și 2 din prezentul regulament se efectuează de către o entitate sau o persoană independentă din punct de vedere funcțional de entitățile sau persoanele care gestionează proiectele.
 Articolul 9
 Păstrarea documentelor justificative
 (1) Autoritatea responsabilă se asigură că toate evidențele, documentele și metadatele referitoare la cheltuielile declarate și la veniturile alocate, precum și la auditurile și controalele efectuate sunt păstrate la dispoziția Comisiei (inclusiv a OLAF) și a Curții de Conturi Europene timp de cel puțin patru ani după exercițiul financiar în care s-a declarat plata finală.
 În acest scop, autoritatea responsabilă stabilește norme privind păstrarea de evidențe, documente și metadate de către beneficiari.
 (2) În cazul în care autoritatea responsabilă în cauză identifică unele nereguli, documentele justificative menționate la alineatul (1) sunt păstrate la dispoziția Comisiei timp de cel puțin trei ani după exercițiul în care sumele în cauză au fost recuperate integral de la beneficiar și creditate către programul național.
 (3) În cazul în care se lansează o procedură de verificare a conformității, astfel cum se menționează la articolul 47 din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 514/2014, documentele justificative menționate la alineatul (1) al prezentului articol sunt păstrate la dispoziția Comisiei timp de cel puțin un an după exercițiul în care s-a încheiat procedura respectivă.
 (4) În cazul în care o decizie de conformitate face obiectul unei proceduri judiciare în fața Curții de Justiție a Uniunii Europene, documentele justificative relevante sunt păstrate la dispoziția Comisiei timp de cel puțin un an după exercițiul în care s-au încheiat aceste proceduri.
 (5) Documentele justificative menționate la alineatele (1), (2), (3) și (4) sunt păstrate la dispoziția Comisiei fie pe suport de hârtie, fie în format electronic.
 Documentele pot fi păstrate exclusiv în format electronic numai în cazul în care legislația națională a statului membru în cauză permite utilizarea documentelor în format electronic în procedurile judiciare naționale ca dovadă a operațiunilor care stau la baza acestora.
 (6) Statele membre pot să prevadă perioade mai lungi pentru păstrarea documentelor justificative.
 Articolul 10
 Prezentul regulament intră în vigoare în ziua următoare datei publicării în Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene.
 Prezentul regulament este obligatoriu în toate elementele sale și se aplică direct în statele membre în conformitate cu tratatele.
 Adoptat la Bruxelles, 29 mai 2015.
 Pentru Comisie
 Președintele
 Jean-Claude JUNCKER
 (1) JO L 150, 20.5.2014, p. 112.
 (2) Regulamentul delegat (UE) nr. 1042/2014 al Comisiei din 25 iulie 2014 de completare a Regulamentului (UE) nr. 514/2014 cu privire la desemnarea și la responsabilitățile de gestionare și control ale autorităților responsabile și cu privire la statutul și la obligațiile autorităților de audit (JO L 289, 3.10.2014, p. 3).
 (3) Regulamentul (UE, Euratom) nr. 966/2012 al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului din 25 octombrie 2012 privind normele financiare aplicabile bugetului general al Uniunii și de abrogare a Regulamentului (CE, Euratom) nr. 1605/2002 al Consiliului (JO L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1).


text:
 |
 52010PC0730
 /* COM/2010/0730 galīgā redakcija - NLE 2010/0351 */ Priekšlikums PADOMES LĒMUMS par Savienības finanšu palīdzības piešķiršanu Īrijai
 [pic] | EIROPAS KOMISIJA |Briselē, 3.12.2010COM(2010) 730 galīgā redakcija2010/0351 (NLE)PriekšlikumsPADOMES LĒMUMSpar Savienības finanšu palīdzības piešķiršanu ĪrijaiSEC(2010) 1516 galīgā redakcijaPASKAIDROJUMA RAKSTSĪrija nesen izjuta pieaugošu spiedienu finanšu tirgos, atspoguļojot bažas par Īrijas publisko finanšu ilgtspējību. Pašreizējā krīze ir smagi ietekmējusi arī Īrijas publiskās finanses. Atbalsta pasākumi banku sektoram, tostarp būtiski kapitāla ieguldījumi, ir lielā mērā veicinājuši lejupslīdes izraisīto publisko finanšu stāvokļa pasliktināšanos. Pašreizējās tirgus problēmas galvenokārt atspoguļo to, ka Īrijas valsts maksātspēja un banku sistēma krīzes laikā ir neatgriezeniski sasaistītas; tā rezultātā strauji ir pieauguši Īrijas valsts obligāciju ienākumi, bet Īrijas banku sistēmai ir liegta pieeja starptautiskā tirgus finansējumam un tā ir arvien vairāk paļāvusies uz Eurosistēmas finansējumu.Ņemot vērā šo smago ekonomikas un finanšu traucējumu, Īrija 2010. gada 21. novembrī Eiropas Savienībai, euro zonas dalībvalstīm un Starptautiskajam Valūtas fondam (SVF) oficiāli lūdza finanšu palīdzību, lai atbalstītu politikas programmu uzticības atjaunošanai un ļautu atjaunot ekonomikā ilgtspējīgu izaugsmi, kā arī nodrošinātu finanšu stabilitāti Īrijā, euro zonā un ES. Ekonomikas un finanšu korekciju programmas projekta, kas iesniegts Komisijā un Padomē, mērķis ir atjaunot finanšu tirgu uzticību Īrijas banku sektoram un Īrijas valstij. Tajā ietverti trīs galvenie elementi. Pirmkārt, finanšu sektora stratēģija, kas ietver banku sektora pamatīgu samazināšanu, parādsaistību samazināšanu un reorganizāciju, ko papildina atbilstīga rekapitalizācija. Otrkārt, vērienīga fiskālās konsolidācijas stratēģija, kurā izklāstīti sīki fiskālās konsolidācijas pasākumi, kuru mērķis ir vidējā termiņā panākt valsts bruto parāda stabilu samazināšanos. Treškārt, vērienīga strukturālo reformu programma, jo īpaši attiecībā uz darba tirgu, lai veicinātu pielāgošanos un stiprinātu ekonomikas izaugsmes potenciālu.Programma aptver laikposmu no 2010. līdz 2013. gadam. Programmas finanšu pakete segs finansējuma vajadzības līdz pat 85 miljardu euro apmērā, tostarp līdz 35 miljardiem euro, lai atbalstītu banku sistēmu, un līdz 50 miljardiem euro, lai segtu iespējamās fiskālā finansējuma vajadzības. Puse no banku atbalsta pasākumiem (17,5 miljardi euro) tiks finansēta ar Īrijas ieguldījumu, izmantojot Valsts kases skaidrās naudas rezervi un Valsts Pensiju rezerves fonda ieguldījumus. Ir lūgta Savienības palīdzība Īrijai līdz 22,5 miljardu euro apmērā saskaņā ar Eiropas finanšu stabilizācijas mehānismu ( EFSM ), kas izveidots ar Padomes 2010. gada 11. maija Regulu (ES) Nr. 407/2010. Tā būtu daļa no kopējā atbalsta, ko sniedz Īrijas partneri Eiropā un kas kopā ar SVF aizdevumu SDR 19,5 miljardu apmērā (aptuveni 22,5 miljardi euro) Paplašinātās kreditēšanas mehānisma ietvaros veido 45 miljardus euro. Šajā kontekstā Savienības palīdzības sniegšana Īrijai līdz 22,5 miljardu euro apmērā saskaņā ar Eiropas finanšu stabilizācijas mehānismu ( EFSM ), kas izveidots ar Padomes 2010. gada 11. maija Regulu (ES) Nr. 407/2010, ļautu atbalstīt ekonomikas ilgtspējīgas attīstības atjaunošanu, nodrošināt pareizi funkcionējošu banku sistēmu un finansiālo stabilitāti Savienībā un euro zonā. Savienības palīdzība tiktu izmaksāta ar līdz pat 13 maksājumiem un būtu saistīta ar ekonomikas politikas nosacījumiem. Tā ir jāsniedz uz tādiem nosacījumiem, kas ir līdzīgi SVF nosacījumiem.2010/0351 (NLE)PriekšlikumsPADOMES LĒMUMSpar Savienības finanšu palīdzības piešķiršanu ĪrijaiEIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS PADOME,ņemot vērā Līgumu par Eiropas Savienības darbību (LESD) un jo īpaši tā 122. panta 2. punktu,ņemot vērā Padomes 2010. gada 11. maija Regulu (ES) Nr. 407/2010, ar ko izveido Eiropas finanšu stabilizācijas mehānismu[1],tā kā:1. Īrija nesen izjuta pieaugošu spiedienu finanšu tirgos, atspoguļojot bažas par Īrijas publisko finanšu ilgtspējību, ņemot vērā visaptverošus publiskā atbalsta pasākumus novājinātajam finanšu sektoram. Pārmērīgās saskares ar nekustamā īpašuma un būvniecības projektiem dēļ Īrijas banku sistēma ir cietusi lielus zaudējumus pēc tam, kad šīs nozares piedzīvoja sabrukumu. Pašreizējā ekonomikas un banku sektora krīze ir smagi skārusi arī Īrijas publiskās finanses, papildinot lejupslīdes radīto ietekmi. Nodokļu ieņēmumu samazināšanās, kā arī ciklisko izdevumu pieaugums, jo īpaši pieaugošā bezdarba dēļ, ir veicinājuši vispārējā budžeta deficītu un krasu parāda pieaugumu, salīdzinot ar to labvēlīgāko pirmskrīzes stāvokli un neskatoties uz to, ka kopš 2008. gada vidus ir īstenotas piecas svarīgas fiskālās konsolidācijas paketes. Atbalsta pasākumi banku sektoram, tostarp būtiski kapitāla ieguldījumi, ir lielā mērā veicinājuši publisko finanšu stāvokļa pasliktināšanos. Pašreizējās tirgus problēmas galvenokārt atspoguļo to, ka Īrijas valsts maksātspēja un banku sistēma krīzes laikā ir neatgriezeniski sasaistītas; tā rezultātā strauji ir pieauguši Īrijas valsts obligāciju ienākumi, bet Īrijas banku sistēmai ir liegta pieeja starptautiskā tirgus finansējumam un tā ir arvien vairāk paļāvusies uz Eurosistēmas finansējumu.2. Ņemot vērā šo smago ekonomikas un finanšu traucējumu, ko izraisīja ārkārtas notikumi ārpus valdības kontroles, Īrijas iestādes 2010. gada 21. novembrī Eiropas Savienībai, euro zonas dalībvalstīm un Starptautiskajam Valūtas fondam (SVF) oficiāli lūdza finanšu palīdzību, lai atbalstītu ekonomikas ilgtspējīgas izaugsmes atjaunošanu, nodrošinātu pareizi darbojošos banku sistēmu un finanšu stabilitāti Savienībā un euro zonā. Tehniskā līmenī 2010. gada 28. novembrī tika panākta vienošanās par visaptverošu politikas paketi laikposmam no 2010. līdz 2013. gadam.3. Ekonomikas un finanšu korekciju programmas projekta (turpmāk "programma"), kas iesniegts Komisijā un Padomē, mērķis ir atjaunot finanšu tirgu uzticību Īrijas banku sektoram un Īrijas valstij, ļaujot atjaunot ekonomikas ilgtspējīgu izaugsmi. Lai sasniegtu šos mērķus, programmā ir ietverti trīs galvenie elementi. Pirmkārt, finanšu sektora stratēģija, kas ietver banku sektora pamatīgu samazināšanu, parādsaistību samazināšanu un reorganizāciju, ko papildina atbilstīga rekapitalizācija, ciktāl tā ir nepieciešama. Otrkārt, vērienīga fiskālās konsolidācijas stratēģija, balstoties uz Valsts atveseļošanas plānu 2011.-2014. gadam, kuru iestādes publicēja 2010. gada 24. novembrī. Plānā izklāstīti sīki fiskālās konsolidācijas pasākumi, kuru mērķis ir vidējā termiņā panākt valsts bruto parāda stabilu samazināšanos. Iestādes ir apņēmušās līdz 2015. gadam – pārskatītajam termiņam, ko Padome noteica 2010. gada [7]. decembrī, – samazināt deficītu zem 3 % no IKP. Treškārt, balstoties arī uz Valsts atveseļošanas plānu, programmā izklāstīta vērienīga strukturālo reformu programma, jo īpaši attiecībā uz darba tirgu, lai veicinātu pielāgošanos un stiprinātu ekonomikas izaugsmes potenciālu. Iestādes lūdz finanšu palīdzību no Savienības, euro zonas dalībvalstīm, divpusējus aizdevumus no Apvienotās Karalistes, Zviedrijas un Dānijas, kā arī SVF, lai atbalstītu šo vērienīgo politikas paketi.4. Saskaņā ar Komisijas pašreizējām prognozēm par nominālo IKP pieaugumu (1,4 % 2011. gadā, 2,7 % 2012. gadā un 3,8 % 2013. gadā) fiskālās korekcijas, kas norādītas Padomes 2010. gada [7]. decembra ieteikumā Īrijai atbilstīgi Līguma 126. panta 7. punktam, atbilst parāda un IKP attiecībai 98,9 % 2010. gadā, 113,5 % 2011. gadā, 120,0 % 2012. gadā un 121,8 % 2013. gadā. Tādējādi parāda un IKP attiecība tiktu stabilizēta 2013. gadā un pēc tam pakāpeniski samazinātos, pieņemot, ka deficīta samazināšanā tiek panākts turpmāks progress. Parāda dinamiku ietekmē vairākas zembilances operācijas, kuras, kā tiek prognozēts, palielinās parāda un IKP attiecību par 5,3 procentu punktiem no IKP 2011. gadā un 0,8 procentu punktiem no IKP 2012. gadā, bet samazinās šo attiecību par 1,3 procentu punktiem no IKP 2013. gadā. Tās ietver prognozētos kapitāla ieguldījumus bankās 2011. gadā, skaidras naudas rezervju samazinājumus un atšķirības starp uzkrāto procentu un skaidras naudas procentu maksājumiem.5. Komisijas vērtējums sadarbībā ar ECB ir, ka Īrijai ir nepieciešams finansējums kopsummā 85 miljardu euro apmērā laikposmā no 2010. gada decembra līdz 2013. gada beigām. Neskatoties uz būtisko fiskālo korekciju, finansējuma iztrūkums valstij programmas darbības laikā var sasniegt 50 miljardus euro. Par pamatu tam ņemtas ilgtermiņa parāda, kam tuvojas maksājuma termiņš, pagarinājuma likmes 0 % apmērā līdz 2011. gada beigām, 20 % apmērā 2012. gadā un 80 % apmērā 2013. gadā. Konservatīvi pieņēmumi par pagarinājumu ir veikti arī attiecībā uz īstermiņa parādu. Programmā iekļautā finanšu nozares stratēģija, lai atjaunotu uzticību Īrijas banku sistēmai uz ilgtspējīgiem pamatiem, ietver banku atbalsta programmu līdz pat 35 miljardu euro apmērā. Tas veido tūlītēju kapitāla iepludināšanu līdz 10 miljardu euro apmērā atsevišķās bankās, lai palielinātu to 1. līmeņa pamatkapitāla proporciju līdz 12 %, vienlaikus finansējot arī savlaicīgus pasākumus nolūkā atbalstīt parādsaistību samazināšanu un ņemot vērā diskontu piemērošanu papildu aizdevumiem, kas pārskaitāmi Valsts aktīvu pārvaldības aģentūrai ( National Asset Management Agency , NAMA ). Turpmākiem nosacītiem kapitāla nodrošinājumiem 25 miljardu euro apmērā būtu jāsniedz garantija, ka bankas spēj ievērot pašreizējās un turpmākās kapitāla prasības. Tomēr reālās finansējuma vajadzības var būt krietni mazākas, jo īpaši tad, ja būtiski uzlabojas tirgus apstākļi un programmas darbības laikā nerodas smagi, neparedzēti banku zaudējumi.6. Programma tiktu finansēta, izmantojot ieguldījumus no ārējiem avotiem un Īrijas līdzekļu rezerves. Savienības palīdzība Īrijai sasniegtu līdz 22,5 miljardiem euro saskaņā ar Eiropas finanšu stabilizācijas mehānismu ( EFSM ), kas izveidots ar Padomes 2010. gada 11. maija Regulu (ES) Nr. 407/2010. Tā būtu daļa no kopējā atbalsta, ko sniedz Īrijas partneri Eiropā un kas sasniedz 45 miljardus euro. Papildus atbalstam no EFSM aizdevumi no Īrijas partnervalstīm ES ietvertu ieguldījumus no Eiropas finanšu stabilitātes instrumenta (17,7 miljardi euro), kā arī divpusējus aizdevumus no Apvienotās Karalistes, Zviedrijas un Dānijas (kopā 4,8 miljardi euro). Turklāt Īrija ir lūgusi SVF aizdevumu SDR 19,5 miljardu apmērā (aptuveni 22,5 miljardi euro) Paplašinātās kreditēšanas mehānisma ietvaros. Īrijas ieguldījums būtu 17,5 miljardi euro, un to iegūtu, izmantojot Valsts kases esošās skaidrās naudas rezervi un ieguldījumus no Valsts Pensiju rezerves fonda ( NPRF ). Atbalsts no EFSM ir jāsniedz uz tādiem nosacījumiem, kas ir līdzīgi SVF nosacījumiem.7. Padomei būtu regulāri jāpārskata Īrijas īstenotā ekonomikas politika, jo īpaši saistībā ar ikgadējiem pārskatiem par Īrijas atjaunināto stabilitātes programmu un valsts reformu programmas īstenošanu, kā arī pārmērīga budžeta deficīta novēršanas procedūras ietvaros.8. Savienības finansiālā palīdzība būtu jāpārvalda Komisijai. Konkrētie ekonomikas politikas nosacījumi, par kuriem panākta vienošanās ar Īriju, būtu jāparedz saprašanās memorandā. Sīkāki finanšu nosacījumi būtu jāparedz aizdevuma līgumā.9. Ik ceturksni Komisijai, organizējot vizītes un izskatot Īrijas iestāžu regulāri iesniegtos ziņojumus, regulāri jāpārbauda, ka tiek pildīti ekonomikas politikas nosacījumi, saskaņā ar kuriem palīdzība ir piešķirta.10. Visā programmas īstenošanas gaitā Komisijai jāsniedz papildu ieteikumi par politiku un tehniskā palīdzība konkrētās jomās.11. Operācijām, kuras palīdz finansēt ar Savienības finansiālo palīdzību, ir jābūt saderīgām ar Savienības politiku un jāatbilst Savienības tiesību aktiem. Intervences finanšu iestāžu atbalstam ir jāveic saskaņā ar Savienības noteikumiem par konkurenci.12. Palīdzība jāsniedz ar mērķi atbalstīt veiksmīgu programmas īstenošanu,IR PIEŅĒMUSI ŠO LĒMUMU.1. pants13. Savienība nodod Īrijas rīcībā aizdevumu, kura maksimālais apjoms ir 22,5 miljardi euro, ar maksimālo vidējo dzēšanas termiņu uz 7,5 gadiem.14. Finansiālā palīdzība ir pieejama trīs gadus, sākot no pirmās dienas pēc tam, kad ir stājies spēkā šis lēmums.15. Komisija piešķir Savienības finansiālo palīdzību Īrijai ne vairāk kā 13 daļās. Vienu daļu var izmaksāt vienā vai vairākos maksājumos. Pirmās daļas maksājumu dzēšanas termiņi var būt ilgāki nekā maksimālais vidējais dzēšanas termiņš, kas minēts 1. punktā. Šādos gadījumos turpmāko maksājumu dzēšanas termiņus nosaka tā, lai maksimālais vidējais dzēšanas termiņš, kas minēts 1. punktā, tiek sasniegts, tiklīdz visas daļas ir izmaksātas.16. Pirmo daļu piešķir ar noteikumu, ka stājas spēkā aizdevuma līgums un saprašanās memorands.17. Īrija maksā Savienības finansējuma reālās izmaksas par katru maksājumu, kā arī 292,5 bāzes punktu rezervi, kā rezultātā nosacījumi būs līdzīgi SVF atbalsta nosacījumiem.18. Turklāt Īrija sedz Regulas Nr. 407/2010 7. pantā minētās izmaksas.19. Ja tas vajadzīgs aizdevuma finansēšanai, ir atļauti pienācīgi procentu likmes mijmaiņas darījumi ar visaugstākās kredītkvalitātes partneriem.20. Komisija lemj par turpmāko finansējuma daļu apmēru un izmaksāšanu. Komisija lemj par katra maksājuma apmēru.2. pants21. Šo palīdzību Komisija pārvalda tā, lai tas atbilstu Īrijas saistībām un Padomes ieteikumiem, jo īpaši ieteikumiem, kas adresēti Īrijai, saistībā ar valsts reformu programmas, kā arī Stabilitātes un izaugsmes pakta īstenošanu.22. Komisija vienojas ar Īrijas iestādēm par konkrētajiem ekonomikas politikas nosacījumiem, saskaņā ar kuriem šī finansiālā palīdzība tiek piešķirta, kā paredzēts 3. pantā. Šos nosacījumus paredz saprašanās memorandā atbilstīgi 1. punktā minētajām saistībām un ieteikumiem. Sīkāki finanšu nosacījumi tiek paredzēti aizdevuma līgumā, kas noslēdzams ar Komisiju.23. Komisija regulāri pārbauda, vai tiek ievēroti ekonomikas politikas nosacījumi, saskaņā ar kuriem šī palīdzība piešķirta. Šajā nolūkā Īrijas iestādes nodod Komisijas rīcībā visu vajadzīgo informāciju un pilnībā sadarbojas ar Komisiju. Komisija EFK informēs par aizņēmumu iespējamu refinansēšanu vai finanšu nosacījumu pārstrukturēšanu.24. Īrija pieņem un īsteno papildu konsolidācijas pasākumus, lai nodrošinātu makrofinansiālo stabilitāti, ja šādi pasākumi ir nepieciešami palīdzības programmas laikā. Īrijas iestādes pirms jebkādu papildu pasākumu pieņemšanas konsultējas ar Komisiju.3. pants25. Ar šo tiek apstiprināta Īrijas iestāžu sagatavotā korekciju programma.26. Pārējo daļu izmaksa notiks, ja apmierinoši tiks izpildīta Īrijas valdības korekciju programma, kas jāiekļauj Īrijas stabilitātes programmā un valsts reformu programmā, un jo īpaši, ja tiks izpildīti īpašie ekonomikas politikas nosacījumi, kas paredzēti saprašanās memorandā. Tie inter alia ietver pasākumus, kas paredzēti šā panta 4. līdz 9. punktā.27. Kopējais valsts budžeta deficīts 2011. gadā nedrīkst pārsniegt 10,6 % no prognozētā IKP, 2012. gadā – 8,6 % no IKP un 2013. gadā – 7,5 % no IKP, lai Īrija līdz 2015. gadam spētu samazināt budžeta deficītu zem 3 % no IKP. Prognozētā gada budžeta deficīta attīstība neietver iespējamo tiešo ietekmi, ko rada potenciālie banku atbalsta pasākumi valdības finanšu sektora stratēģijas kontekstā, kā izklāstīts Memorandā par ekonomikas un finanšu politiku ( MEFP ) un precizēts saprašanās memorandā, kas parakstāms starp Komisiju un Īrijas iestādēm. Turklāt šī attīstība atbilst Eurostat sākotnējam viedoklim par EKS95 grāmatvedības uzskaiti par to procentu maksājumu uzskaites laiku par parādzīmēm, kas maksājami Anglo Irish Bank [2], tādējādi šā viedokļa pārskatīšanas rezultātā būtu jāpārskata budžeta deficīta attīstība.28. Īrija līdz norādītā gada beigām pieņem pasākumus, kas minēti 7. līdz 9. punktā, un konkrēti termiņi 2011.-2013. gadam tiks noteikti saprašanās memorandā, kas parakstāms starp Komisiju un Īrijas iestādēm. Īrija ir gatava veikt papildu konsolidācijas pasākumus, lai līdz 2015. gadam samazinātu budžeta deficītu zem 3 % no IKP, ja attiecībā uz deficīta mērķiem piepildās 3. punktā minētie nelabvēlīgie riski.29. Lai atjaunotu uzticību finanšu sektoram, Īrija adekvāti rekapitalizē banku sistēmu, strauji samazina tās parādsaistības un to pilnīgi pārstrukturē, kā izklāstīts saprašanās memorandā. Konkrēti, Īrija:(a) rīkojas, lai nodrošinātu, ka Allied Irish Banks , Bank of Ireland , Educational Building Society un Irish Life and Permanent tiek vajadzības gadījumā rekapitalizētas pašu kapitāla veidā, lai nodrošinātu, ka tiks ievērota prasība par minimālo kapitālu 10,5 % apmērā no 1. līmeņa pamatkapitāla, ņemot vērā Uzraudzības kapitāla atbilstības pārskata rezultātus 2011. gadam;(b) pēc iespējas īsākā laikposmā, ņemot vērā finanšu stabilitātes un publisko finanšu apsvērumus, veic tās līdzdalības bankās nodalīšanu, kas iegūta krīzes laikā;(c) īsteno konkrētu plānu Anglo Irish Bank un Irish Nationwide Building Society noregulējumam, kura mērķis ir pēc iespējas samazināt kapitāla zaudējumus, kas izriet no šo dzīvotspēju zaudējušo kredītiestāžu likvidēšanas.30. Līdz 2010. gada beigām Īrija veic šādus pasākumus.Pieņem budžetu 2011. gadam, tostarp fiskālās konsolidācijas pasākumus 6 miljardu euro apmērā ar mērķi samazināt valsts budžeta deficītu 3. panta 3. punktā minētajā laikposmā. Budžetā ietver pasākumus ieņēmumu jomā, lai 2011. gadā iekasētu vismaz 1400 miljonus euro, tostarp iedzīvotāju ienākuma nodokļa likmju un atlaižu pazemināšanu vai līdzvērtīgus pasākumus, lai 2011. gadā iegūtu 945 miljonus euro, pensiju nodokļa atvieglojumu un ar pensijām saistītu atvilkumu samazināšanu, lai 2011. gadā iegūtu 155 miljonus euro, vispārējo nodokļu izdevumu samazinājumu, lai 2011. gadā iegūtu 220 miljonus euro, akcīzes un dažādu nodokļu pasākumu palielinājumu, lai 2011. gadā iegūtu 80 miljonus euro. Turklāt budžetā paredz, ka valdība izklāstīs metodes, kā ar vienreizēju un citu pasākumu palīdzību 2011. gadā iegūt vismaz 700 miljonus euro. Budžetā ietver arī kārtējo izdevumu samazināšanu 2011. gadā vismaz 2090 miljonu euro apmērā, tostarp: sociālās aizsardzības izdevumu samazināšanu, nodarbinātības samazināšanu valsts dienestā, pašreizējo valsts dienesta pensiju progresīvu samazināšanu par vidēji vairāk nekā 4 %, citus izdevumu ietaupījumus, tostarp tēriņu samazināšanu par precēm un pakalpojumiem un par citiem pārskaitījumiem, valsts kapitālizdevumu samazinājumu par vismaz 1800 miljoniem euro attiecībā pret 2011. gadā jau ieplānoto. Izņēmuma gadījumos, cieši sadarbojoties ar Komisiju, apsver citus pasākumus, kuru rezultātā var iegūt iepriekš minētajiem ietaupījumiem pielīdzināmus ietaupījumus.31. Līdz 2011. gada beigām Īrija veic šādus pasākumus.(a) Samazina valsts dienesta jauno darbinieku atalgojumu par 10 %. Valdība apsver arī atbilstīgu korekciju, tostarp attiecībā uz valsts dienesta algu izmaksām, lai kompensētu iespējamos iztrūkumus no prognozētajiem ietaupījumiem, palielinot administratīvo efektivitāti un samazinot valsts dienesta darbinieku skaitu.(b) Pieņem budžetu 2012. gadam, kurā ietilpst fiskālās konsolidācijas pasākumi vismaz 3,6 miljardu euro apmērā un kura mērķis ir samazināt valsts budžeta deficītu 3. panta 3. punktā minētajā laikposmā. Budžeta projektā jo īpaši ietver pasākumus ieņēmumu jomā, lai iegūtu 1,5 miljardus euro pilnā gadā, to skaitā inter alia iedzīvotāju ienākuma nodokļa likmju un atlaižu pazemināšanu; privāto pensiju nodokļa atvieglojumu samazinājumu; vispārējo nodokļu izdevumu samazinājumu, jaunu īpašuma nodokli, kapitāla pieauguma nodokļa un kapitāla ieguves nodokļa reformu, oglekļa dioksīda nodokļa pieaugumu. Budžetā paredz izdevumu samazinājumu 2012. gadā 2,1 miljarda euro apmērā, tostarp sociālo izdevumu samazinājumus; nodarbinātības samazinājumu valsts sektorā; valsts sektora pensiju un citu programmu izdevumu korekcijas; kā arī kapitālizdevumu samazināšanu.(c) Pabeidz neatkarīgu novērtējumu par vietējo iestāžu atbildības par ūdens pakalpojumu sniegšanu nodošanu ūdens apsaimniekošanas uzņēmumam, un sagatavo priekšlikumus īstenošanai, lai varētu sākt iekasēt maksu 2012./2013. gadā.(d) Pieņem tiesību aktus, lai palielinātu valsts pensijas vecumu līdz 66 gadiem 2014. gadā, 67 gadiem 2021. gadā un 68 gadiem 2028. gadā, lai uzlabotu publisko finanšu ilgtermiņa ilgtspēju. Turklāt veic reformas attiecībā uz valsts dienesta jauno darbinieku pensijas tiesībām, un reformas stājas spēkā ar 2011. gadu. Reformas ietver priekšlaicīgas pensionēšanās pārskatīšanu attiecībā uz konkrētu kategoriju valsts dienesta darbiniekiem un pensiju indeksēšanu atbilstoši patēriņa cenām. Pensijas jābalsta uz vidējo izpeļņu karjeras laikā. Jauno darbinieku pensionēšanās vecumu piesaista valsts pensiju saņēmēju pensionēšanās vecumam.(e) Pieņem pasākumus, kas nostiprina ticamu budžeta stratēģiju un stiprina budžeta pamatnostādnes. Īrija pieņem un īsteno fiskālo noteikumu, ka visi papildu neplānotie ieņēmumi 2011.-2015. gadā tiks novirzīti budžeta deficīta un parāda samazināšanai. Saskaņā ar priekšlikumu, kas izklāstīts Valsts atveseļošanas plānā 2011.-2014. gadam, Īrija izveido budžeta konsultatīvo padomi, lai sniegtu neatkarīgu novērtējumu par valsts budžeta stāvokli un prognozēm. Īrija pieņem Fiskālās atbildības likumu, ar kuru ievieš vidēja termiņa izdevumu programmu ar saistošām daudzgadu robežvērtībām izdevumiem katrā jomā. To veic, ņemot vērā visas pārskatītās ekonomikas pārvaldības reformas ES un izmantojot par pamatu jau esošās reformas.(f) Īrija pieņem likumdošanas pārmaiņas, lai novērstu ierobežojumus tirdzniecībai un konkurencei aizsargātās nozarēs, tostarp juridiskajā profesijā, medicīnas pakalpojumos un farmaceita profesijā.(g) Rekapitalizē Īrijas pašmāju bankas līdz sākotnējam līmenim – 1. līmeņa pamatkapitālam 12 % apmērā, ņemot vērā diskontu piemērošanu papildu aizdevumiem, kas pārskaitāmi NAMA , un finansējot parādsaistību drīzu samazināšanu, sistēmā darot pieejamus 10 miljardus euro. Rekapitalizāciju veic ar kapitāla akcijām (vai līdzvērtīgiem instrumentiem attiecībā uz Educational Building Society ).(h) Ievieš tiesību aktus, lai veiktu minimālās algas reformu tā, lai sekmētu darbavietu radīšanu, un rīkotos, lai novērstu nozaru minimālo algu radītos kropļojumus, kā arī, vienojoties ar Komisiju, veic neatkarīgu pārskatu par reģistrētajiem nodarbinātības pamatlīgumiem ( Registered Employment Agreements ) un nodarbinātības noteikumu rīkojumiem ( Employment Regulation Orders ).(i) Veic bezdarbnieku pabalstu sistēmas reformu, lai uzlabotu stimulus ātri atgriezties darba tirgū. Aktivizācijas pasākumus stiprina, labāk identificējot darba meklētāju vajadzības, uzlabojot iesaisti un izstrādājot sankcijas, lai nodrošinātu, ka pabalstu saņēmēji meklē darbu vai iziet apmācību; to papildina ar efektīvāku uzraudzību. Sankciju mehānismu izveido tā, lai tas radītu reālu ienākumu zaudējumu, vienlaikus neuzliekot pārmērīgu sodu.(j) Publicē padziļinātu pārskatu par personīgo parādu režīmu un sāk darbu pie tiesību aktu reformas, kuri līdzsvaros gan kreditoru, gan debitoru intereses.(k) Sagatavo ziņojumu, kurā sniegts neatkarīgs novērtējums par elektrības un gāzes nozarēm, lai palīdzētu publisko finanšu vajadzībām un palielinātu konkurenci. Iestādes apspriežas ar Komisiju par novērtējuma rezultātiem nolūkā noteikt atbilstīgus mērķus.(l) Lai uzlabotu konkurenci atvērtos tirgos, reformē tiesību aktus, lai radītu ticamāku preventīvu efektu, paredzot sodanaudu un citu sankciju iespējamu piemērošanu konkurences lietās. Turklāt konkurences iestādēm būs jānosaka nozares, kuras reāli atrodas ārpus konkurences tiesību darbības jomas, un jānosaka procedūras šo izņēmumu risināšanai.(m) Lai veicinātu izaugsmi mazumtirdzniecības nozarē, valdība veic pētījumu, lai izpētītu ekonomisko ietekmi, ko radītu pašreizējo griestu likvidēšana attiecībā uz mazumtirdzniecības telpu izmēriem, ar mērķi uzlabot konkurenci un pazeminātu cenas patērētājiem. Pētījuma rezultātā izstrādātās politikas īstenošana tiks apspriesta ar Komisiju.32. Līdz 2012. gada beigām Īrija veic šādus pasākumus.(a) Pieņem budžetu 2013. gadam, tostarp fiskālās konsolidācijas pasākumus, kas sasniedz vismaz 3,1 miljardu euro, ar mērķi samazināt valsts budžeta deficītu 3. panta 3. punktā minētajā laikposmā. Konkrēti, budžetā ietver pasākumus ieņēmumu jomā, lai iekasētu vismaz 1,1 miljardu euro (ietverot pārnesumu no 2012. gada), tostarp: iedzīvotāju ienākuma nodokļa likmju un atlaižu pazemināšanu, privāto pensiju nodokļa atvieglojumu samazinājumu; vispārējo nodokļu izdevumu samazinājumu un īpašuma nodokļa ieviešanu. Budžetā paredz arī izdevumu samazināšanu 2013. gadā vismaz 2 miljardu euro apmērā, tostarp: sociālo izdevumu samazināšanu, nodarbinātības samazināšanu valsts dienestā, valsts dienesta pensiju korekcijas, citu programmu izdevumu samazināšanu, kā arī kapitālizdevumu samazināšanu.(b) Iesniedz tiesību aktus Parlamentā, lai reformētu personīgo parādu režīmu ar mērķi nodrošināt labāku līdzsvaru starp kreditoru un debitoru interesēm.33. Lai nodrošinātu, ka tiek nevainojami izpildīti programmas nosacījumi, un palīdzētu ilgtspējīgā veidā novērst nelīdzsvarotību, Komisija pastāvīgi sniedz konsultācijas un padomus par fiskālajām, finanšu tirgu un strukturālajām reformām un palīdzības programmas ietvaros kopā ar SVF un sadarbībā ar ECB periodiski pārskata pieņemto pasākumu efektivitāti un ekonomisko un sociālo ietekmi, kā arī iesaka vajadzīgos labojumus nolūkā uzlabot izaugsmi un darbavietu radīšanu, nodrošināt nepieciešamo fiskālo konsolidāciju un samazināt nelabvēlīgu sociālo ietekmi, jo īpaši attiecībā uz visneaizsargātākajiem Īrijas sabiedrības locekļiem.4. pantsĪrija atver īpašu kontu Īrijas Centrālajā Bankā, lai pārvaldītu Savienības finansiālo palīdzību.5. pantsŠis lēmums ir adresēts Īrijai.6. pantsŠo lēmumu publicē Eiropas Savienības Oficiālajā Vēstnesī .Briselē,Padomes vārdā —priekšsēdētājsPĀRSKATS PAR IETEKMI UZ BUDŽETU(sal. iekšējo noteikumu 16. pantu)POLITIKAS JOMA: SADAĻA 01 — EKONOMIKA UN FINANSESDARBĪBA: FINANŠU DARĪJUMI UN INSTRUMENTIDARBĪBAS NOSAUKUMS: EIROPAS FINANŠU STABILIZĀCIJAS MEHĀNISMS – FINANSIĀLĀ PALĪDZĪBA ĪRIJAI1. PRIEKŠLIKUMA NOSAUKUMS: ATTIECĪGĀ BUDŽETA POZĪCIJA UN SADAĻA01 04 01 03 Eiropas Savienības garantija ES aizdevumiem, kas piesaistīti finansiālajam atbalstam saskaņā ar Eiropas finanšu stabilizācijas mehānismu2. JURIDISKAIS PAMATS:Līguma 122. panta 2. punkts; Padomes Regula Nr. 407/210.3. FINANŠU GADA VISPĀRĒJIE RĀDĪTĀJI (EURO)Šis postenis ir Eiropas Savienības nodrošinātu garantiju struktūra. Tas ļauj Komisijai apkalpot parādus (kapitālu, procentus un citus izdevumus) parādnieku (šajā gadījumā Īrijas) saistību nepildīšanas gadījumā.Budžeta iegrāmatojums („p.m.”), kas atspoguļo budžeta garantiju, tiks izmantots vienīgi tad, ja garantija faktiski tiks pieprasīta. Parasti budžeta garantija netiek pieprasīta.3.a – Kārtējais gadsNeattiecasSA |Sākotnējā finanšu gada apropriācija (budžets) |Pārvietojumi |Papildu apropriācija |Apropriācija kopā |Apropriācijas, kas jau rezervētas citai darba programmai |Pieejamais atlikums |Ierosinātajam pasākumam piešķirtā summa |3.b – Pārnestās summasNeattiecasSA |Pārnestās summas |Apropriācijas, kas jau rezervētas citai darba programmai |Pieejamais atlikums |Ierosinātajam pasākumam piešķirtā summa |3.c – Nākamais finanšu gadsNeattiecasSA |Sākotnējā finanšu gada apropriācija (budžets) | p.m. |Pārvietojumi |Papildu apropriācija |Apropriācija kopā |Apropriācijas, kas jau rezervētas citai darba programmai |Pieejamais atlikums |Ierosinātajam pasākumam piešķirtā summa | p.m. |4. DARBĪBAS APRAKSTSIerosinātā vidēja termiņa finansiālā palīdzība Īrijai ir Savienības aizdevums EUR 22,5 miljardu apmērā (ko finansēs no Savienības aizņēmumiem starptautiskajos kapitāla tirgos). Tā tiks sniegta saistībā ar starptautisku finansējuma paketi. Konkrēti, aizdevumi no Īrijas partnervalstīm ES ietvertu ieguldījumus no Eiropas finanšu stabilitātes instrumenta (17,7 miljardi euro), kā arī divpusējus aizdevumus no Apvienotās Karalistes, Zviedrijas un Dānijas (4,8 miljardi euro). Turklāt Īrija ir lūgusi Starptautiskajam Valūtas fondam aizdevumu SDR 19,5 miljardu apmērā (aptuveni 22,5 miljardi euro) Paplašinātās kreditēšanas mehānisma ietvaros. Īrijas ieguldījums būtu 17,5 miljardi euro, un to iegūtu, izmantojot Valsts kases esošās skaidrās naudas rezervi un ieguldījumus no Valsts Pensiju rezerves fonda ( NPRF ). Savienības finansiālais atbalsts Īrijai ir paredzēts, lai atbalstītu ekonomikas ilgtspējīgas izaugsmes atjaunošanu un nodrošinātu pareizi funkcionējošu banku sistēmu. Vienlaikus šī palīdzība, atjaunojot uzticību, palīdz nodrošināt finansiālo stabilitāti ES un euro zonā.Savienības aizņēmumus, kas Īrijai paredzētā aizdevuma nolūkā iegūti kapitāla tirgos vai no finanšu iestādēm, sedz no Savienības budžeta. Aizdevuma pamatsumma, kuru piešķirs Īrijai, ir 22,5 miljardi euro.Eiropas Savienības budžeta nodrošinātās garantijas struktūra ir tāda, kas dod iespēju Komisijai apkalpot šo parādu arī tad, ja Īrija nepilda savas saistības.Lai izpildītu savas saistības, Komisija pagaidu kārtā šo parādu var apkalpot, izmantojot savus skaidras naudas līdzekļus. Šādā gadījumā jāpiemēro 12. pants Padomes 2000. gada 22. maija Regulā (EK, Euratom) Nr. 1150/2007, ar ko īsteno Lēmumu 2007/436/EK, Euratom par Eiropas Kopienu pašu resursu sistēmu (OV L 130, 31.5.2000., 1. lpp.).5. PIEŅEMTĀ APRĒĶINU METODENeattiecas6. MAKSĀJUMU GRAFIKS (EURO)NeattiecasPozīcija | Apropriācijas | Maksājumi |Gads n | Gads n+1 | Gads n+2 | Gads n+3 | Turpmākie finanšu gadi |Gads n |Gads n+1 |Gads n |Gads n+1 |Kopā |[1] OV L 118, 12.5.2010., 1. lpp.[2] Skatīt http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/government_finance_statistics/methodology/advice_member_states.