Traduction de «Time analysis option » (Anglais → Français) :

37. Emphasises the central role of sound budgetary management, based on a set of rules and procedures aimed at determining how public budgets are to be prepared, implemented and monitored in the medium term, taking account of the Member States' budgetary consolidation and the reorganisation of public expenditure, to be accompanied by a context analysis method (at Community, national and local level) and the definition of objectives, including prior and subsequent impact assessment, verification and evaluation of results and performanc ...[+++]es, and adjustment mechanisms by PBB; considers that steps should be taken to ensure that Member States' fiscal governance rules are homogeneous and context-driven in as regards both their timing and their objectives, in particular within the euro area; considers also that those fiscal governance rules should be linked to economic governance, with a view to promoting shared budgetary economic and investment options, being geared to the same goals in order to be more effective and have a multiplier effect, and achieving significant results, which are all the more necessary in difficult economic circumstances such as those currently being experienced; takes the view that there is a danger that uncoordinated national economic revival plans may cancel each other out; notes with this in mind that national budgets must be drawn up on the basis of joint economic perspectives and analyses;

Treatment is 15 times better in a cost benefit analysis than the next most effective funding option.

82. Welcomes the commitment of the Austrian Presidency to continue the practice of demarches in respect of all of the EU's international partners regarding the ratification of international conventions banning the use of torture; asks the Council and the Commission to consider new and innovative ways to implement the Guidelines on torture; underlines that, although those Guidelines were adopted as long ago as 2001, they are among the least implemented; in view of the current threats facing the absolute prohibition of torture and ill-treatment in the international context of counter-terrorism; calls, in this regard, on the Council to associate the European Parliament in the future evaluation process of these guidelines; in this regard, ...[+++]informs the Council that its sub-committee on Human Rights asked for a study aiming at optimising the implementation of the EU Guidelines on Torture and improving the means provided for by these guidelines; recommends to the Austrian and Finnish Presidency that they conduct demarches on torture in all countries that are signatories to the relevant conventions but appear not to be cooperating; emphasises that the regular presence of the Presidency or the Council Secretariat in the relevant UN Committee on Torture could bring substantial material input into a strategic analysis of which countries to demarche at which point in time; asks the Council to consider if the European Union could not act more forcefully and more convincingly vis-à-vis third countries if all Member States would sign and ratify the UN's Optional Protocol on Torture; is also concerned at the allegations of relocation and outsourcing of torture in third countries and calls on the EU to consider the fight against torture as a top priority of its human rights policy, in particular through an enhanced implementation of the EU Guidelines and all other EU instruments such as the EIDHR;

83. Welcomes the commitment of the Austrian Presidency to continue the practice of demarches in respect of all of the EU's international partners regarding the ratification of international conventions banning the use of torture; asks the Council and the Commission to consider new and innovative ways to implement the Guidelines on Torture; emphasises that, although those Guidelines were adopted as long ago as 2001, they are among the least implemented; in view of the current threats facing the absolute prohibition of torture and ill-treatment in the international context of counter-terrorism; calls on the Council to associate Parliament in the future evaluation process of the Guidelines; in that connection, informs the Council that its ...[+++] sub-committee on Human Rights has asked for a study aimed at optimising the implementation of the EU Guidelines on Torture and improving the means provided for by those Guidelines; recommends to the Austrian and Finnish Presidencies that they conduct demarches on torture in all countries that are signatories to the relevant conventions but appear not to be cooperating; emphasises that the regular presence of the Presidency or the Council Secretariat in the relevant UN Committee on Torture could bring substantial material input into a strategic analysis of which countries to demarche at which point in time; asks the Council to consider whether the European Union could not act more forcefully and more convincingly vis-à-vis third countries if all Member States were to sign and ratify the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ; is also concerned at the allegations of relocation and outsourcing of torture in third countries and calls on the EU to consider the fight against torture as a top priority of its human rights policy, in particular through enhanced implementation of the EU Guidelines and all other EU instruments such as the EIDHR;

I'm talking about an interdepartmental group of officials, outside the ambit of the Department of Finance, whose responsibility is to develop real options, bankable options, operational options not fictitious ones, but real ones that could be put to the test in terms of helping the government shift the direction of the ship of state one degree at a time (0945) A team of eight or ten departments working in collaboration, preferably with PCO, could start making suggestions that are robust and backstopped by economic analysis, environmental analysis, and social analysis.

26. Points out that, in deciding on a replacement system, the Commission must plan for the longer term and develop the most reliable and practical computerised accounting system on the market which is compatible with developing international public sector accounting standards (IPSAS); requests a cost-benefit analysis of the two alternatives expressed in options 2 and 3 in order for the budget and discharge authority to assess the implications in terms of the budget, establishment plan and effectiveness of choices; notes, at the same time, that the Commission estimates the external resources needed for the development of the IT system at EUR 18.6 million;