(Return tabled) Question No. 206 Mr. Alex Atamanenko: With respect to Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) program entitlement, the appeals process and exclusion from entitlement to other federal agricultural programs: (a) are appellants entitled to know what recommendations are made by the Western Amalgamated Appeals Sub-Committee and, if so, how is a copy of the recommendations obtained by the appellant; (b) are appellants entitled to know on what grounds the Intermediate Appeals Sub-Committee rejects recommendations of the Western Amalgamated Appeals Sub-Committee and, if so, how is a copy of the recommendations obtained by the appellant; (c) has the CAIS administration ever issued rejection letters to an appellant before ...[+++]or after soliciting the involvement of an appeals committee and, if so, how is a copy of the motion or other directive permitting this obtained by the appellant; (d) who is responsible for forwarding recommendations made by the Western Amalgamated Appeals Sub-Committee to the next level of appeal; (e) are there any legitimate grounds upon which the National CAIS Committee (NCC) administration is allowed to refuse an appellant the full extent of an appeal by neglecting to forward the recommendations of the Western Amalgamated Appeals Sub-Committee to the next level of appeal; (f) does the appeal process deal with appeals on a case by case basis or can the NCC administration short-circuit the appeals process based on a judgment that an appellant's complaint is just like the one that may have preceded it; (g) are there guidelines established that would give an appellant a reasonable expectation of the time it should take to address an appeal at all the various levels and, if so, what are the guidelines that govern a reasonable expectation; (h) is the appellant justified in expecting that the decisions made by appeals committees will be communicated to the appellant; (i) what are the circumstances under which it would be accepta ...

‘Eligible counterparties may appoint cash in transit companies as agents acting on their behalf and at their risk for the purpose of storage and sub-frontloading of euro banknotes and coins to professional third parties on condition that: (i) notwithstanding the appointment of an agent, eligible counterparties comply with all applicable rules and procedures laid down in this Guideline; and (ii) eligible counterparties conclude contractual arrangements with cash in transit companies stipulating that the cash in transit companies shall fulfil the obligations laid down in Article 10(a) and (b) and in Articles 13(1) to 13(3)’.

In order to verify the presence of the frontloaded euro banknotes and coins and the arrangements under which the eligible counterparties carry out sub-frontloading, eligible counterparties, including their appointed agents, shall grant their future Eurosystem NCB the right to audit and inspect their premises.

Credit institutions and national post offices should therefore be allowed to appoint cash-in-transit companies as their agents for the purpose of sub-frontloading euro banknotes and coins.

Consequently, these airports, which have become mainly commercial companies, negotiate favourable conditions on a case-by-case basis in order to attract airlines and thus increase traffic volumes. Thus, following the establishment of Ryanair, a number of sub-agents set themselves up at Charleroi(41).

Research will focus on: identification of causal agents including contaminants, and physiological mechanisms, of environmental, and food-linked environmental hazards; understanding of exposure pathways, estimation of cumulative, low dose and combined exposures; long-term effects; definition and protection of susceptible sub-groups; environmental causes and mechanisms responsible for the increase in allergies; impact of endocrine disrupters; chronic chemical pollution and combined environmental exposures, transmission of illnesses linked to water (parasites, viruses, bacteria, etc.).