Traduction de «risk-profiled fund » (Anglais → Français) :

Member States shall require AIFM to set up and implement remuneration policies and practices that comply with the requirements set out in Annex 1b and are consistent with and promote sound and effective risk management, that do not encourage excessive risk-taking, that counter short-term profit motives, that are consistent with the risk profiles, fund rules or instruments of incorporation of the AIF they manage, and that are in line with the business objectives and the long- term interests of the AIFM and investors.

If market funding is not available and in order to avoid resolution actions from being funded by the state, supplementary funding will be provided by resolution funds which will raise contributions from banks proportionate to their liabilities and risk profiles.

Individuals don't have to seek advice if they purchase a life cycle fund. There are funds like that, but I would say that the characteristic of a defined contribution, particularly over the long term, is that an individual's risk profile and needs are going to change and they are going to want to be able to.This is a characteristic of most funds, or, I should say, of most of the defined contribution plans.

(Return tabled) Question No. 456 Ms. Kirsty Duncan: With respect to the current pandemic of new influenza A (H1N1): (a) what specific healthcare professional stakeholder groups have been consulted since the beginning of the H1N1 pandemic, what was the consultation process, and what concerns were raised; (b) what concerns from the consultation process have been addressed, what concerns are remaining, and by what date will they be addressed; (c) what, if any, additional funding was requested to address identified challenges; (d) do identified stakeholder groups report there are sufficient human resources and supplies to meet the need du ...[+++]ring a second wave of H1N1 and, if not, what are the identified gaps; (e) what, if any, additional education and training was requested by stakeholder groups; (f) what procedures are in place to ensure applicability, consistency and clarity of protocols to healthcare professional organizations, and do stakeholders report that they are receiving clear, concise, timely messaging; (g) what, if any, differences exist in how healthcare professionals will be protected among provinces and territories; (h) what specific agreements have been made in respect to assuring sufficient human resources during a second wave; (i) what, if any, differences exist between the national guidelines and those of the provinces and territories, with respect to antivirals, N-95 masks, vaccines, and other personal protective measures, and how should healthcare professionals address any discrepancies; (j) what are the known and suspected benefits and risks of the H1N1 vaccine; (k) what non-clinical and clinical trials have been or are being undertaken regarding the H1N1 vaccine, on what dates were they completed, and what are the outcomes of these trials; (l) what possible side effects, including rare events, might be expected with the H1N1 vaccine; (m) what are the possible legal risks associated with an H1N1 vaccination programme, and what efforts have ...

43. Expresses serious concern that the "governance profiles" developed by the Commission for each ACP country, which will guide programming for development assistance in relation to the EUR 2,700,000,000 additional funds under the 10th EDF, have been prepared without any participatory element; notes that eligibility for additional funds of beneficiary countries has been judged according to a set of criteria relating to such issues as migration, trade liberalisation and the fight against terrorism, with only one criterion directly linked to the MDGs; expresses dismay that the Commission's "profiles" risk hollowing out the APRM process a ...[+++]nd that, only after the programming of the additional fund is over, does the Commission propose to launch, outside the APRM process, a "Governance Forum", and that "in order to facilitate more effective support to the Pan-African governance architecture (.) the EU will explore new avenues to pull Community and Member States funding"; calls on the Commission to consult and inform the European Parliament and the Council on the follow-up and the implementation of these funds in order to make sure they are allocated to governance initiatives, to support the AU governance agenda and the APRM process;

43. Expresses serious concern that the ‘governance profiles’ developed by the Commission for each ACP country, which will guide programming for development assistance in relation to the EUR 2.7 billion additional funds under the 10th EDF, have been prepared without any participatory element; notes that the eligibility for additional funds of beneficiary countries has been judged by a set of criteria relating to such issues as migration, trade liberalisation and the fight against terrorism, with only one criterion directly linked to t ...[+++]he MDGs; expresses dismay that the Commission's ‘profiles’ risk hollowing out the APRM process and that, only after the programming of the additional fund is over, the Commission proposes to launch, outside the APRM process, a “Governance Forum”, and that “in order to facilitate more effective support to the Pan-African governance architecture (.) the EU will explore new avenues to pull Community and Member States funding”; asks the Commission to consult and inform the European Parliament and the Council on the follow-up and the implementation of these funds in order to make sure they are allocated to governance initiatives, to support the AU governance agenda and the APRM process;