Traduction de «design basis vibratory ground motion » (Anglais → Français) :

(p) to focus on ensuring national ownership of peacebuilding strategies, from initial design to implementation on the ground, drawing on best practices and success stories; to advance a cross-cutting development agenda on the basis of which state-building is supported by well-articulated peacebuilding and development efforts with strong economic aspects at their core,

(Return tabled) Question No. 206 Mr. Alex Atamanenko: With respect to Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) program entitlement, the appeals process and exclusion from entitlement to other federal agricultural programs: (a) are appellants entitled to know what recommendations are made by the Western Amalgamated Appeals Sub-Committee and, if so, how is a copy of the recommendations obtained by the appellant; (b) are appellants entitled to know on what grounds the Intermediate Appeals Sub-Committee rejects recommendations of the Western Amalgamated Appeals Sub-Committee and, if so, how is a copy of the recommendations obtained ...[+++] by the appellant; (c) has the CAIS administration ever issued rejection letters to an appellant before or after soliciting the involvement of an appeals committee and, if so, how is a copy of the motion or other directive permitting this obtained by the appellant; (d) who is responsible for forwarding recommendations made by the Western Amalgamated Appeals Sub-Committee to the next level of appeal; (e) are there any legitimate grounds upon which the National CAIS Committee (NCC) administration is allowed to refuse an appellant the full extent of an appeal by neglecting to forward the recommendations of the Western Amalgamated Appeals Sub-Committee to the next level of appeal; (f) does the appeal process deal with appeals on a case by case basis or can the NCC administration short-circuit the appeals process based on a judgment that an appellant's complaint is just like the one that may have preceded it; (g) are there guidelines established that would give an appellant a reasonable expectation of the time it should take to address an appeal at all the various levels and, if so, what are the guidelines that govern a reasonable expectation; (h) is the appellant justified in expecting that the decisions made by appeals committees will be communicated to the appellant; (i) what are the circumstances under which it would be accepta ...

1. The Advisory Forum shall be composed of members from competent bodies specialised in gender equality issues, on the basis of one representative designated by each Member State, as well as three members, without the right to vote, nominated by the Commission and representing interested parties at European level, such as non-governmental organisations which have a legitimate interest in contributing to the fight against discrimination on grounds of sex and the promotion o ...[+++]f gender equality, representatives of employers and workers organisations at Community level.

1. The Advisory Forum shall be composed of members from competent bodies specialised in gender equality issues, on the basis of two representatives designated by each Member State, including one representative of those non-governmental organisations which have a legitimate interest in contributing to the fight against discrimination on grounds of sex and the promotion of gender equality.

It is designed to protect health care workers who wish not to participate in the procuring of abortions. It makes it an offence for anyone to attempt to dismiss these people from their jobs if they refuse to do so on moral or religious grounds (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)

the additional ground for refusal based on fundamental rights - the Council looked at whether an uneven implementation of the Framework Decision on this point could entail a discrimination in respect of the persons arrested on the basis of an European arrest warrant depending on whether or not the judge of the executing state has to review the consistency of the European arrest warrant with fundamental rights, which could run counter to the principle of mutual recognition; the additional ground ...[+++] for refusal based on political reasons - the question examined was whether a ground of non-recognition as regards political reasons for issuing an European arrest warrant would go beyond the Framework Decision; designation of the Ministry of Justice as executing authority - the Council examined whether that designation interfered with the principle on which the European arrest warrant was based since it had been conceived as being entirely judicial, with the guarantees of judicial independence and freedom from political influence that follow; application "ratione temporis" of the Framework Decision - the Council examined how to resolve the fact that the legislation of some Member States was incompatible and that certain European arrest warrants or extradition requests could not be issued or executed.