Translation of "Price Test Working Group " (English → French) :

14. Notes that technical simplification is essential for consumers and that to this end, having regard to the work of the Working Group Report on ‘Transparency in EU Retail Energy Markets’, the same price components should be present in the offer, the contract and the bill, and the presentation of this data should be aligned; believes that in order to make consumers more proactive in the management of energy consumption, they need to be made aware of ways to control consumption, as well as po ...[+++]ssibilities for energy savings, and energy efficiency and small-scale production; agrees with the Working Group Report in that comparison tools and websites can be a good tool for consumers, if run in an independent, transparent and trustworthy manner; recommends the Commission and the Member States to rollout price comparison websites and consumer-friendly information campaigns, in which local and regional governments should take an active role; welcomes the idea of verifying the accuracy and objectivity of price comparison tools by means of an on-line trust mark; calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of such a trust mark for comparison tools and websites at EU level;

13. Considers that there are different national approaches to assessing the effects of aircraft crashes on the safety of NPPs; notes that ‘aircraft crashes have not been considered explicitly as an initiating event in the safety assessments’, and that only their effects have been outlined in the stress test specifications; regrets, however, the fact that only four Member States have included such assessments in their stress test reports; notes, nonetheless, that the stress test specifications state that ’the assessment of consequences of loss of safety functions is relevant also if the situation is provoked by indirect initiating even ...[+++]ts for instance (...) airplane crash’; also notes that, given that this risk falls primarily within the area of Member States’ national security concerns and, therefore, sovereignty, an Ad Hoc Group on Nuclear Security (AHGNS) has been set up with the task of examining the issue in detail and publishing its conclusions; is aware that further exchanges between Member States are planned on that subject within appropriate forums such as the European Nuclear Security Regulators Association (ENSRA); asks all interested stakeholders, including Member States, the Commission, ENSREG, ENSRA and NPP operators, to work together in order to anticipate and agree a common approach to dealing with the risk of aircraft crashes, while recognising that this risk falls within the area of Member States’ national security concerns and sovereignty;

12. Considers that there are different national approaches to assessing the effects of aircraft crashes on the safety of NPPs; notes that ‘aircraft crashes have not been considered explicitly as an initiating event in the safety assessments’, and that only their effects have been outlined in the stress test specifications; regrets, however, the fact that only four Member States have included such assessments in their stress test reports; notes, nonetheless, that the stress test specifications state that ‘the assessment of consequences of loss of safety functions is relevant also if the situation is provoked by indirect initiating even ...[+++]ts for instance (...) airplane crash’; also notes that, given that this risk falls primarily within the area of Member States’ national security concerns and, therefore, sovereignty, an Ad Hoc Group on Nuclear Security (AHGNS) has been set up with the task of examining the issue in detail and publishing its conclusions; is aware that further exchanges between Member States are planned on that subject within appropriate forums such as the European Nuclear Security Regulators Association (ENSRA); asks all interested stakeholders, including Member States, the Commission, ENSREG, ENSRA and NPP operators, to work together in order to anticipate and agree a common approach to dealing with the risk of aircraft crashes, while recognising that this risk falls within the area of Member States’ national security concerns and sovereignty;

– having regard to the Policy Research Working Paper 'Placing the 2006/08 Commodity Price Boom into Perspective' by J. Baffes and T. Haniotis, the World Bank Development Prospects Group, July 2010,

2. Recalls the 24-year history of pedestrian-friendly car fronts to date, with EU and national funding of research in this field, the work of the European Enhanced Vehicle-Safety Committee (EEVC) and its different working groups, contradictory benefit studies by several national road safety institutes on one side and the European Association of Automotive Manufacturers (ACEA) on the other, debates on test methods, the presentation at a relatively early stage of cars which to a considerable extent already meet the ...[+++]EEVC criteria, the aborted attempts by the Commission to come forward with a legislative proposal and the subsequent promises in various communications to attempt again to propose a legislative act, and European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro-NCAP) tests in which most cars performed rather poorly;

(e) making an inventory and obtaining copies of existing Eco-labels, standards, test methods and studies that are relevant for the establishment of an Eco-label for the product group, taking into account the work done on related product groups, and estimating the costs of testing.