Traduction de «post-refugee claim advisory committee » (Anglais → Français) :

30. Takes note of the creation of the new Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services on 1 November 2013; recalls that it was created in a budgetary neutral way by redeployments from DGs PRES and IPOL and that the new Directorate-General will not require new human or financial resources in 2015; calls for information on the number of posts in the new Directorate in August/September 2014, including the planned transfer of posts from the two European Advisory Committees, as compared to the situation in January 2014 and asks for a breakdown of how its external expertise resources are to be used, which shou ...[+++]ld be presented to the Committee on Budgets in due time for the preparation of the Parliament's reading of the budget for 2015;

33. Welcomes the steady but timid progress towards a more balanced gender participation in FP7, since diversity is important for creativity and innovation; points out that female researchers tend to work on smaller, less profiled research projects and tasks and that a highly problematic ‘glass ceiling’ seems to exist for female researchers, leading to a decrease of the share of female researchers with seniority, as also indicated by the low number of female researchers selected for the ERC advanced investigator grant; agrees that measures to boost female participation should be reinforced throughout project lifecycles (with particular attention to flexible working hours, improved child-care facilities, social security provisions and paren ...[+++]tal leave) and that the Commission should reinvigorate its approach to promoting female scientists and should aim to galvanise Member States to address gender gaps; underlines that the 40% target for female participation in the Programme and Advisory Committees should be sensitively implemented; calls on the Commission to establish a cross-cutting committee to monitor and advice on the representation of female researchers and to develop a Gender Action Plan as recommended by the FP6 Ex Post Evaluation; calls on universities and EU Institutions to promote science as an interesting field for both sexes from early stages of education on, by promoting female researchers as role models;

33. Welcomes the steady but timid progress towards a more balanced gender participation in FP7, since diversity is important for creativity and innovation; points out that female researchers tend to work on smaller, less profiled research projects and tasks and that a highly problematic ‘glass ceiling’ seems to exist for female researchers, leading to a decrease of the share of female researchers with seniority, as also indicated by the low number of female researchers selected for the ERC advanced investigator grant; agrees that measures to boost female participation should be reinforced throughout project lifecycles (with particular attention to flexible working hours, improved child-care facilities, social security provisions and paren ...[+++]tal leave) and that the Commission should reinvigorate its approach to promoting female scientists and should aim to galvanise Member States to address gender gaps; underlines that the 40% target for female participation in the Programme and Advisory Committees should be sensitively implemented; calls on the Commission to establish a cross-cutting committee to monitor and advice on the representation of female researchers and to develop a Gender Action Plan as recommended by the FP6 Ex Post Evaluation; calls on universities and EU Institutions to promote science as an interesting field for both sexes from early stages of education on, by promoting female researchers as role models;

33. Welcomes the steady but timid progress towards a more balanced gender participation in FP7, since diversity is important for creativity and innovation; points out that female researchers tend to work on smaller, less profiled research projects and tasks and that a highly problematic ‘glass ceiling’ seems to exist for female researchers, leading to a decrease of the share of female researchers with seniority, as also indicated by the low number of female researchers selected for the ERC advanced investigator grant; agrees that measures to boost female participation should be reinforced throughout project lifecycles (with particular attention to flexible working hours, improved child-care facilities, social security provisions and paren ...[+++]tal leave) and that the Commission should reinvigorate its approach to promoting female scientists and should aim to galvanise Member States to address gender gaps; underlines that the 40% target for female participation in the Programme and Advisory Committees should be sensitively implemented; calls on the Commission to establish a cross-cutting committee to monitor and advice on the representation of female researchers and to develop a Gender Action Plan as recommended by the FP6 Ex Post Evaluation; calls on universities and EU Institutions to promote science as an interesting field for both sexes from early stages of education on, by promoting female researchers as role models;

The processing of these cases includes 30 days for CIC to refer the case to the Immigration and Refugee Board; 35 days for the claimant to file a personal information form, which sets out the basis of the refugee claim; 10 months for the IRB to render a decision; 15 days to file for leave to seek judicial review of a negative IRB decision at the federal court, running concurrently with 30 days to file an application for a post-claim risk assessment, which takes CIC seven months, on average, to decide, during which time the federal court takes an averag ...[+++]e of four to six months to decide whether to grant leave to seek judicial appeal.

The Committee emphasizes the importance that the gender guidelines issued by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada continue to be applied to refugee claims from designated countries of origin.