Traduction de «outil de raisonnement évolué » (Français → Anglais) :

22. Deplores the fact that research funding is still very fragmented in Europe, with multiple sources of funding from the Member States and the Community applying different priorities, evaluation criteria, definitions and procedures, leading to unnecessary overlap, confusion, error and lack of critical mass; asks the Commission and the Council to put the issues of cooperation and coordination between the various EU and national programmes at the top of the agenda; calls on the Commission to carry out an analysis to improve the link between European and national actions, including possible coordination in the phases of formulating calls ...[+++] for proposals and evaluating projects, as well as the identification of national rules or laws that hinder or complicate the financial management of international research cooperation projects; asks that calls for proposals, including those of July 2011, be issued in consultation with the Member States, not duplicating or competing with national initiatives but complementing them; in this respect, considers that the ERA-Net scheme should be strengthened as a tool to support excellence and the development of criteria for quality indicators which constitutes the basis for coordination between programmes or joint ventures; suggests that FP7 should complement the efforts of actors managing national programmes involved in joint programming in order to move the RDFPs away from project management thinking towards programme management thinking, but without neglecting the management of small projects; believes that for Joint Programming to be successful, projects should be selected on the basis of excellence, tailored to the characteristics of each sector, the coordinating role of the Commission should be strengthened, and participating Member States should honour their financial commitments; asks that the last three years of FP7 be devoted to helping structure the European Research Area;

Mr. Weir, would the government have been better off setting aside its non- interventionist approach and adopting a more pragmatic approach to develop these sectors and give them the necessary tools to adapt?

So those are tools that we can evolve into that domain.

It will be an evolution of our current tool kit, that's for sure, but I think something can be done certainly in the next five years, since the full impact, as we indicated in our deck, is probably a half-generation away.

Farming methods and implements have been transformed, the nature of farm work has changed radically, and rural architecture has also changed.

I believe that the Committee on Legal Affairs – which adopted this report by a large majority, or, indeed unanimously – has succeeded in finding a suitable compromise between the different approaches to the structure of such companies found in continental Europe on the one hand and in British legal thinking on the other, especially on the issue of equity, where we achieved a good compromise on the basis that equity ought, as a matter of principle, to exist, but without the obligation to make cash payments, which, as a means whereby registration may be made easier, is, in my view, a step in the right direction and also shows how it is possible for the Commission to submit a proposal with the Council ...[+++] then being able to find a rational compromise between the various legal traditions.