I will start by noting that in the 2004 accord, three of what we call pan-Canadian health organizations were mentioned: The Canadian Institute for Health Information was referenced apropos of reporting on wait times; Canada Health Infoway was referred to in the context of moving forward and making further progress on development and uptake of electronic health records; and the Health Council of Canada was referenced in the context of reporting on bes ...[+++]t practices and progress against various of the elements of the accord.

Where sectoral agricultural legislation requires Member States to submit, within a specific period of time, information on the number of checks carried out under Article 59 and their outcomes and where the Member States overrun that period, the Commission may suspend the monthly payments referred to in Article 18 or the interim payments referred to in Article 36 provided that the Commission has made available to the Member States in good time prior to the start of the reference period all the information ...[+++], forms and explanations they need to compile the relevant statistics.

(Return tabled) Question No. 286 Mr. Alex Atamanenko: With regard to the horse slaughter industry in Canada: (a) does the government know whether third party monitoring of video footage is occurring at Viandes Richelieu and Bouvry Exports and, if so, (i) what is the monitoring criteria, (ii) who is monitoring the footage, (iii) what actions, if any, have been taken as a result of observations, (iv) is footage monitoring to be a daily practice at this and other Canadian horse slaughter plants, (v) how many hours have been monitored, (v ...[+++]i) is footage archived and for how long, (vii) does the recording continuously loop over previous footage; (b) which tissue types and/or bodily fluids are targeted by the government when testing for phenylbutazone and other drugs in horsemeat, (i) what percentage of drug testing is performed on equine organs (particularly kidney and liver) as opposed to other tissues, such as muscle, (ii) what is the exact methodology and what are the specific testing mechanisms used to detect phenylbutazone and other drugs in horsemeat; (c) what surveys or studies has the government undertaken or relied on to determine the number of overall horse owners and keepers that have administered to horses under their care, even once in the horse's lifetime, substances that are banned for human consumption, in (i) Canada, (ii) the United States (US); (d) what surveys or studies encompassing the overall horse population has the government undertaken or relied on to determine the percentage of veterinarians who routinely administer to horse patients under their care, at any time in the horse's lifetime, substances that are banned for use in food animals, in (i) Canada, (ii) the US; (e) what was the ratio between the number of horses and the number of prescriptions of substances banned for use in food animals at any time in their lifetime, issued by veterinarians to the overall horse population in (i) Canada, (ii) the US; (f) what were the results of European ...

For genetically engineered starting materials this information shall include details such as the description of the starting cells or strains, the construction of the expression vector (name, origin, function of the replicon, promoter enhancer and other regulator elements), control of the sequence of DNA or RNA effectively inserted, oligonucleotidic sequences of plasmid vector in cells, plasmid used for cotransfection, added or deleted genes, biological properties of the final construct and the genes expressed, copy number and genetic ...[+++] stability.

By the time they had actually created and started that project, a lot of information which in the 1990s, when the project was conceived, was not in the public domain because the product monograph was not considered part of the public domain at the time, had been then relegated to the public domain by the time they started.

The AOSIS protocol proposal and the German delegation's suggestions will as well as others form part of the negotiations (c) Report of the ad hoc group to the second Conference of the Parties on the state of negotiations on the protocol; completion of the negotiations six months before the third Conference of the Parties in order to allow adoption during that Conference (d) Inclusion in the ad hoc group's working programme, in cooperation with the other subsidiary bodies, of an analysis or assessment to identify potential and possible policies and measures for achieving limitations and progressive reductions of greenhouse gas emissions (e) Consideration of the following key elements ...[+++] for inclusion in the protocol: (i) comprehensiveness of the protocol, covering all greenhouse gases, their sources and sinks and all relevant sectors; (ii) common but differentiated responsibilities of Parties in line with their respective capabilities and possibilities: - lead responsibility of Annex I Parties through specific commitments, individually or jointly, strengthening and enlarging those undertaken in Article 4(2)(a) and (b) of the Convention, - participation, over time, of non-Annex I Parties as recognized in Article 4(2)(f) and (g); establishment of a framework leading to sustainable patterns of economic development that will secure steadily increasing economic growth while restraining the growth of greenhouse gas emissions; (iii) combined approach including both policies and measures as well as targets and timetables such as 2005 and 2010, taking into account the differences in starting points and approaches, economic structures and resource bases as set out in Article 4(2)(a); (iv) coordinated policies and measures covering CO2 and other greenhouse gases, in particular in those areas where international coordination is called for in view of competitiveness concerns, priority being given to: - measures subject to competitiveness concerns; - measures concerning globall ...