Traduction de «Comité de développement de la Force terrestre » (Français → Anglais) :

28. Calls on the Commission to propose a better SEPA governance, covering the organisational setup related to the development of the main features of payment services and of the implementation of the requirements which need to be met, and allowing the development of technical and security standards to be organised separately in support of the implementation of the related legislation; calls for a more balanced representation of all stakeholders in the further development of common technical and security standards for payment schemes; urges the Commission to answer its previous calls for reform of SEPA governance so as to ensure better ...[+++]representation of payment services users in the decision-making and standard-setting process; notes that these stakeholders ay include – but are not necessarily restricted to – the EPC, consumer organisations, merchant organisations and large retail chains, the European Banking Authority (EBA), the Commission, experts in various fields, non-banking payment service providers, and mobile, internet and card commerce and mobile network operators; calls on these stakeholders to arrange their work under a new governance structure where the SEPA Council has a role; considers that the SEPA Council should be assisted by various technical committees, or ‘task forces’ for e-payment, m-payment, cards, cash and other standardisation issues, and by ad hoc working groups; recalls the Commission's commitment, in the declaration on SEPA governance on the adoption of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012, to come up with proposal before the end of 2012; calls on European standardisation bodies such as the European Committee for Standardisation (Comité Européen de Normalisation, CEN) and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), in cooperation with the Commission, to play a more active role in standardising card payments;

28. Calls on the Commission to propose a better SEPA governance, covering the organisational setup related to the development of the main features of payment services and of the implementation of the requirements which need to be met, and allowing the development of technical and security standards to be organised separately in support of the implementation of the related legislation; calls for a more balanced representation of all stakeholders in the further development of common technical and security standards for payment schemes; urges the Commission to answer its previous calls for reform of SEPA governance so as to ensure better ...[+++]representation of payment services users in the decision-making and standard-setting process; notes that these stakeholders ay include – but are not necessarily restricted to – the EPC, consumer organisations, merchant organisations and large retail chains, the European Banking Authority (EBA), the Commission, experts in various fields, non-banking payment service providers, and mobile, internet and card commerce and mobile network operators; calls on these stakeholders to arrange their work under a new governance structure where the SEPA Council has a role; considers that the SEPA Council should be assisted by various technical committees, or ‘task forces’ for e-payment, m-payment, cards, cash and other standardisation issues, and by ad hoc working groups; recalls the Commission's commitment, in the declaration on SEPA governance on the adoption of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012, to come up with proposal before the end of 2012; calls on European standardisation bodies such as the European Committee for Standardisation (Comité Européen de Normalisation, CEN) and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), in cooperation with the Commission, to play a more active role in standardising card payments;

45. Regrets that, since the elimination of the EU’s dedicated budget line in 2007, the EU has lacked an instrument that is flexible and multi-country in nature, responding coherently to mine action priorities, and that there is, in quantitative terms, a drop in overall EU funding for mine action; calls therefore for the restoration of a more dedicated approach, with one budget line under one lead directorate that will signal the strength of the EU’s continued commitment to mine a ...[+++]ction, which needs to take into account the specific needs of individual countries as laid down in Country Strategy Papers and, at the same time, the fact that in some countries the existence of landmines has become a structural issue and thus an issue for EU development policy;

44. Regrets that, since the elimination of the EU‘ s dedicated budget line in 2007, the EU has lacked an instrument that is flexible and multi-country in nature, responding coherently to mine action priorities, and that there is, in quantitative terms, a drop in overall EU funding for mine action; calls therefore for the restoration of a more dedicated approach, with one budget line under one lead directorate that will signal the strength of the EU’ s continued commitment to mine a ...[+++]ction, which needs to take into account the specific needs of individual countries as laid down in Country Strategy Papers and, at the same time, the fact that in some countries the existence of landmines has become a structural issue and thus an issue for EU development policy;

A key task is to clearly define the capabilities that Europe's armed forces need to meet these challenges and in co-operation with the EU Military Committee, the European Defence Agency (EDA) is developing a Capability Development Plan to identify priorities for capability needs and development.

To start with the precedents, I must point out that our real mandate, following the Saint-Malo meeting, started in December 1999 in Helsinki when it was decided to create a European rapid reaction force, which would consist of at least 60 000 troops deployable within two months and for at least one year and including logistical support and air, sea and land resources for carrying out the missions we have christened ‘Petersberg tasks’, in a reference to the famous palace near Bonn where they were analysed, and which are basically the maintenance or enforcement of peace and rescue and humanitarian missions, which will have to be created by ...[+++] 2003.