Traduction de «Le deuxième risque qui a été invoqué est que « » (Français → Anglais) :

The second risk that was identified says " .there is a risk that quality service delivery could be affected due to VAC's increasing reliance on partners and service providers in the federal, provincial and municipal governments as well as private sector" .

Before I talk about examples of exchanging information between political parties, I wish to revisit the Notice of Question of Privilege submitted by Senator Cowan and quote from the second paragraph, in which he mentions interference, not because someone interfered with a witness, but he says in the second paragraph, and I quote:

Therefore, to avoid any interference with the competences which are granted to the risk assessors and risk managers under Directive 2001/18/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, a Member State should only use grounds with respect to environmental policy objectives relating to impacts which are distinct from and complementary to the assessment of risks to health and the environment which are assessed in the context of the authorisation procedures provided in Directive 2001/18/EC and in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, such as the maintenance and development of agricultural practices which offer a better potential to reconcile production with ...[+++]ecosystem sustainability, or maintenance of local biodiversity, including certain habitats and ecosystems, or certain types of natural and landscape features, as well as specific ecosystem functions and services.

Those grounds may be invoked individually or in combination, with the exception of the ground set out in point (g) which cannot be used individually, depending on the particular circumstances of the Member State, region or area in which those measures will apply, but shall, in no case, conflict with the environmental risk assessment carried out pursuant to this Directive or to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003.

In support of its appeals, Freixenet puts forward three pleas in law, alleging, first, infringement of Articles 38(3) and 73 of Regulation No 40/94, and Article 296 TFEU and Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, signed in Rome on 4 November 1950, second, infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 and, third, infringement of Article 7(3) of that regulation.

In support of its appeal, the Commission relies, essentially, on three grounds alleging, first, a misinterpretation of the scope of the obligation to give reasons, second, the incompatibility with Community law of the review of assessments made by the members of the selection board and, third, disregard for certain procedural rules in the context of the measures of organisation of procedure adopted at first instance and of the assessment of the evidence.

Any delay in acting upon this undue risk could cause some person somewhere to become another victim of that particular person (1810) The second objection quite often given by the government when these items are talked about is it feels that giving the police this authority would significantly increase their workload.

Speaking just before Senator Cools, Senator Corbin made two points. First, the senator explained that a committee chair functions as a messenger of the committee and is bound by this function to present its report to the Senate.

Those grounds may be invoked individually or in combination, with the exception of the ground set out in point (g) which cannot be used individually, depending on the particular circumstances of the Member State, region or area in which those measures will apply, but shall, in no case, conflict with the environmental risk assessment carried out pursuant to this Directive or to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003.

' Second, in response to Senator Kinsella, Senator Corbin noted that anyone wishing to know the position of individual committee members with respect to the amendments can consult the transcripts of the committee's deliberations.