Traduction de «evaluate dance potential and limitations » (Anglais → Français) :

evaluate dance abilities | evaluate own abilities on dance | evaluate dance potential and limitations | evaluate own dance abilities

Notes that energy reporting obligations as part of a framework are essential to evaluate the progress and implementation of existing energy efficiency legislation; regrets, however, the excessive energy reporting obligations imposed, also by gold-plating by Member States, on businesses, energy producers, consumers and public authorities, which limit the potential for growth and innovation; stresses that reporting duties should wh ...[+++]erever possible be simplified in order to reduce administrative burdens and costs; criticises the fact that data obtained in reporting are often not comparable across the EU due to different breakdowns, methodologies and standards; calls on the Commission to reduce, including through digital solutions, the administrative burden related to reporting obligations and to establish more guidelines on data comparability for better data evaluation; calls for aligning energy demand projections in line with cost-effective saving potential in key sectors, and believes that cutting red tape will speed up the implementation of energy efficiency measures; notes that applying the ‘energy efficiency first’ principle requires reviewing energy planning and reporting and improving policy coherence in order to ensure their mutual reinforcement, recognising that saving energy is Europe’s first and most secure source of energy; notes that energy efficiency can be the best energy ‘source’ investment, improving affordability of energy, driving down the need for additional and costly supply-side infrastructure and helping tackle climate change.

Acknowledges the setting up and development of the SCI, which plays an important role in promoting cultural change and improving business ethics, and which has resulted in the adoption of a set of principles of good practice for vertical relationships in the food supply chain and a voluntary framework for the implementation of those principles which only in the second year of its operation already numbers over one thousand participating companies from across the entire EU, and those mainly SMEs; welcomes the progress made so far, and believes that efforts to promote fair trading practices in the food supply chain should make a real impact but cannot currently be considered sufficient to tackle the problem of UTPs in the food supply chain; ...[+++] stresses, however, that the effectiveness of the SCI, as recognised by both the recent Commission report and external evaluation, is undermined by a broad range of shortcomings, such as weaknesses in governance, limitations in transparency, no enforcement measures or penalties, a lack of effective deterrents against UTPs, and not allowing for individual anonymous complaints by potential victims of UTPs or own-initiative investigations by an independent body, which consequently leads to under-representation of SMEs and farmers, in particular, who may find the SCI inadequate for its purpose; recommends the setting up of similar supply chain initiatives in other relevant non-food sectors.

39. Believes that ‘cluster discussions’ should remain the central element of the mutual evaluation process; considers that a well targeted but limited number of expert participants in cluster discussions creates the conditions for efficiency and delivering outcomes; takes the view that mutual evaluation should be developed further as a procedure for exchanging best practices and policy development experiences between Member States and that the Commission's role could be clarified in terms of providing guidance and steering the proce ...[+++]ss, particularly during these cluster discussions; is of the opinion that the clusters' composition should always reflect Member States' expectations and the potential impact on the Single Market;

39. Believes that ‘cluster discussions’ should remain the central element of the mutual evaluation process; considers that a well targeted but limited number of expert participants in cluster discussions creates the conditions for efficiency and delivering outcomes; takes the view that mutual evaluation should be developed further as a procedure for exchanging best practices and policy development experiences between Member States and that the Commission’s role could be clarified in terms of providing guidance and steering the proce ...[+++]ss, particularly during these cluster discussions; is of the opinion that the clusters’ composition should always reflect Member States’ expectations and the potential impact on the Single Market;