Translation of "réunion informative " (French → English) :

information-gathering session

meeting to pass on information [ information-presenting meeting | information-giving conference ]

ATIP community meeting [ access to information and privacy community meeting ]

debriefing

international meeting

ministerial meeting

summit meeting [ conference of Heads of State | summit | summit conference | Summit conferences(ECLAS) ]

Commission Actions supporting eCall Action Plan Organising two High-Level meetings with Member States promoting 112 and eCall in October 2005, plus several expert meetings and bilateral meetings Expert Group on Emergency Access[11] established in February 2006; launch of a survey on the organisation of emergency services in the Member States (including 112, E112) Infringement procedures opened against Member States on the concerns of the non-availability of caller location information (12 cases against Belgium, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, the Netherlands, Portugal and Slovakia) Informal PSAP E ...[+++]xpert Group[12] established in July 2006, addressing issues specific to emergency rescue services (112, E112 and eCall) and spreading best practices eImpact, in-depth study on the socio-economic benefits of intelligent vehicle safety systems (including eCall) launched in January 2006[13] Toolbox, containing all relevant information related to the eCall initiative launched in November 2005, maintained by eSafetySupport[14] Eurobarometer study on the citizen's perception of road safety and intelligent vehicle safety systems launched in January 2006 Provision of the ICT 2006 standardisation work programme and Request to ETSI (ETSI MSG, Mobile Services Group) to produce the necessary standards for eCall as a priority item Working with the Member States towards a solution on the data protection and privacy issues (Art. 29 Working Party, established by Directive 95/46/EC)[15] Successful demonstration of the full eCall service chain by GST Rescue[16] |

Press release - European Commission proposes signature and conclusion of EU-Canada trade deal Factsheet - CETA - an EU free trade deal fit for the 21st century Press release - Fair Taxation: The Commission sets out next steps to increase tax transparency and tackle tax abuse Factsheet - Questions and Answers on measures to increase tax transparency and tackle tax abuse Press release - Commission strengthens transparency rules to tackle terrorism financing, tax avoidance and money laundering Factsheet - Questions and Answers: Anti-money Laundering Directive Press release - Commission signs agreement with industry on cybersecurity and steps up efforts to tackle cyber-threats Factsheet - Commission boosts cybersecurity industry and steps up e ...[+++]fforts to tackle cyber-threats Press release - New proposals to improve the EU's support for security and development in partner countries Factsheet - Questions and Answers: Commission proposes measures in support of security and development in partner countries Video – Press conference by Commissioner Malmström on the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) Video – Press conference by Commissioners Moscovici and Jourová on the fight against terrorism financing, money laundering and tax evasion Agenda of the meeting (FR) Minutes of the meeting Photos of the meeting

Question No. 112 Hon. Ralph Goodale: With respect to Senate motions No. 2, No. 3 and No. 4 seeking to suspend Senators Brazeau, Duffy and Wallin without pay: (a) was the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) or the Privy Council Office (PCO) consulted or involved in the drafting of the motions, and, if so, who was involved; (b) what are the details of the emails, briefing notes, reports or other documents that were prepared by, or provided to, the PMO or the PCO for the purpose, in whole or in part, of drafting the motions, specifically the titles or files or reference numbers of those documents; (c) what meetings have the PMO or the PCO had, ...[+++]or been involved in, regarding, in whole or in part, the motions; (d) who attended the meetings in (c); (e) what are the details of the emails, briefing notes, reports or other documents that were prepared for or provided, in whole or in part, at these meetings, specifically the titles or files or reference numbers of those documents?

(Return tabled) Question No. 52 Ms. Kirsty Duncan: With regard to Enbridge’s Line 9 reversal project (Line 9 Phase l Reversal Project and Line 9B Reversal and Capacity Expansion Project): (a) what are the results of all government reports, details of briefing notes, or meeting summaries that were produced between January 1, 2011, to June 1, 2013; (b) what studies, analyses or assessments did the government undertake to determine the safety of the project, (i) what are the dates of all studies, analyses, and assessments, (ii) what are the results of each; (c) what are the details of the studies, reports, briefing notes, or meeting summa ...[+++]ries that the government has produced regarding the economic and environmental impacts and, what are (i) the results associated with each, (ii) the costs associated with each; (d) what studies, reports, briefing notes, or meeting summaries has the government undertaken regarding greenhouse gas emissions if the Line 9 pipeline was reversed and filled with diluted bitumen, (i) what were the results of these studies, (ii) how are emissions expected to impact Canada’s ability to achieve its climate commitments; (e) what are the dates of any correspondence between the government or the Minister of Natural Resources or the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Portland Montreal Pipeline Company, and what are the key points for each correspondence; (f) what are the dates of any correspondence between the Minister of Natural Resources and the National Energy Board regarding the hearing process and applications for participation and intervener status; (g) did the Minister of Natural Resources have a role to play in the National Energy Board changing its approach to public participation in hearings, particularly those concerning the proposal to reverse and expand Line 9 and, if so, what was that role; and (h) what effect have the changes adopted in the government’s 2012 budget bills had on the Line 9 review process to date?