Traduction de «groupe centré sur la tâche » (Français → Anglais) :

Where requirements for one or more training tasks specified on the statement of recognition are no longer fulfilled, the recognised training centre should immediately cease to provide training regarding the tasks concerned and inform in writing the competent authority which issued the statement of recognition.

(Return tabled) Question No. 90 Hon. Carolyn Bennett: With respect to the Expert Review Panel on Medical Isotope Production: (a) what were the criteria and rationale to choose the four members of the panel; (b) who declined to sit on the panel; (c) how many times did the panel meet; (d) who did the panel consult; (e) what was the formal mandate of the panel; (f) did the panel have the technical expertise alone to be able to understand the proposals and make recommendations; (g) what is the relation of Dr. Alexander MacEwan, the Special Advisor on Medical Isotopes to the Minister of Health, to the panel; (h) did the panel recommend ...[+++] to the Minister that she implement the four recommendations of the Canadian Association of Nuclear Medicine mentioned at the November 23rd meeting of the Standing Committee on Health; (i) what was the process for the panel to consult with provinces and territories; (j) did the panel consult and meet with each public and private consortium that made a submission to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of their proposal; (k) will the government release the 22 submissions on ideas for isotope supply that were received and reviewed by the panel; (l) what was the role of the firm SECOR in the production of the expert panel report; (m) who, from SECOR, was assigned to this task; (n) what were the recommendations of the panel’s November 30th report to the government; (o) will the panel be dismantled or will it continue its advising role to the government following its November 30th report; and (p) what will be the outcome of the panel and the government’s next steps including, but not limited to, recommendations to proceed with projects, funding recommendations, or another phase of evaluations?

(Return tabled) Question No. 164 Mr. Peter Julian: With regard to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) working groups: (a) what are the regulatory changes, regulatory harmonization, procedural changes, and new programming initiatives proposed by each SPP working group; (b) what are the proposal and the proposals that have led, or are leading to regulatory changes, regulatory harmonization, procedural changes, and new programming initiatives, in every area covered by each working group; (c) what are the names of any and all sub-working groups along with a description of their tasks and issues to cover; (d) what is the lead cou ...[+++]ntry, the agency and the department responsible for each sub-working group; (e) who are the lead officials and the members for each sub-working group; (f) how many person-hours each division with responsibility for a part of the SPP has dedicated to SPP-related tasks, by year for 2005, 2006 and 2007; (g) what share, by division, do SPP-related tasks account by year for 2005, 2006 and 2007; (h) in which working group and sub-working group are copyright-related issues covered; (i) what role have the ongoing SPP negotiations in this area played in the formulation of the government’s copyright-reform legislation; (j) at which SPP meetings was Canadian copyright reform discussed, and who were the participants; (k) how much coordination is there among SPP working groups and their sub-working groups; (l) what is the nature of this coordination, for which the government has indicated it has hired several individuals in the Public Safety and Industry Departments; (m) what are the duties and responsibilities of these individuals; (n) at what level are tradeoffs among the various working groups discussed; (o) how does the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC) interact with the sub-working groups; (p) how often do NACC members interact with officials working on SPP-related projects; (q) who are the lead NACC contacts for eac ...

2. Arrangements shall be made under the relevant provisions of those agreements, specifying in particular the nature, extent and manner in which these countries are to participate in the Centre’s work, including provisions relating to participation in the networks operated by the Centre, inclusion in the list of competent organisations to which certain tasks may be entrusted by the Centre, financial contributions and staff.

A Co-ordination Centre is an undertaking belonging to a multinational group providing services to other members of the group. Under a 10-year license granted by the tax authorities, the taxable revenues of a Co-ordination Centre are determined according to the so-called "cost-plus" method. The cost plus method is normally aimed at avoiding double taxation and limiting tax avoidance. In the cost plus method, the taxable profit is calculated as a percentage of the aggregated operating costs. Although this method of taxation does not constitute State aid per se, its practical application may well give rise to State aid. With respect to the ...[+++]Belgian scheme, the Commission has concluded that the Belgian authorities apply the cost-plus method in a way that gives raise to State aid. Firstly, Belgium systematically uses a default mark-up rate of 8% without verifying whether this rate reflects the economic reality of the services provided by the Co-ordination Centres. Secondly, the way in which the expenditure of the Centre is calculated excludes significant operating cost items of the Centre. Thirdly, the Belgian Co-ordination Centres enjoyed additional tax advantages such as a withholding exemption on income distributions and a real-estate property tax exemption. The benefits reduce the amount of taxable profits and thus grants an advantage not justified under the EU State aid rules.

9. agrees that the Chairman and Vice-Chairmen, together with one representative from the Commission and assisted by the General Secretariat of the Council, will form a preparatory group which will help facilitate the work of the Group; notes the important role of the Commission in supporting the work of the Group, as set out in the Code of Conduct, notably in paragraph I, and in participating in the follow-up work of the Group; notes that, since the Group operates within the framework of the Council, the Secretariat function will be assumed by the General Secretariat of the Council; and is confident that the General Secretariat of the ...[+++] Council and Commission will liaise closely with each other to develop a collaborative approach to ensure an efficient and effective working relationship; 0. agrees that the Group shall meet not less than twice a year at a high level to facilitate a political orientation to the work of the group and that meetings of the group shall be convened by the Chairman on his own initiative or at the request of at least one third of the members of the Group; 1. agrees that, subject to the formal agreement of the Council, and in order to assist the work of the Group one or more sub-groups may be established to consider particular issues ; 2. agrees that the work of the Group shall be confidential; 3. agrees that the reports of the Group forwarded to Council will reflect either the unanimous opinion of its members or the various opinions expressed in the course of the discussion; 4. agrees that, subject to the formal agreement of the Council, any further rules of procedure of the Group may be established ".