(b) verify that the vessel’s flag and markings (e.g. name, external registration number, International Maritime Organisation (IMO) ship identification number, international radio call sign and other markings, main dimensions) are consistent with information contained in the documentation;

38. Observes that project fiches have improved over time with the inclusion of more and better-designed SMART objectives as well as specific indicators for the different components of a project; is, however, concerned that external evaluation reported that some projects lacked focus due to inappropriate indicators, with SMART indicators not always suited to the justice sector; insists on the need for designing qualitative indicators capable of measuring the long-term impact of the projects; calls on the Commission to continue to is ...[+++]sue guidance on the utilisation of performance indicators to be used for programming, monitoring and evaluation purposes for the 2014-20 financial framework in relation to IPA II; is of the opinion that specific indicators in the sector of Justice, Liberty and Security should be developed and used in line with the more strategic approach under IPA II;

2. Suggests aiming at a limited set of relevant indicators which may later be easily complemented by other indicators and at a set of summary indicators, which may embody two complementary perspectives on the environment via a monetarised indicator such as Adjusted Net Savings and a physical indicator such as ecological footprint, carbon footprint or other decoupling indicators, as well as a few broader indicators of social inclusion and human well-being such as the GINI index and the Human Poverty Index or Index of Social Health; suggests that GDP in itself be improved; points as examples to the ‘Index for Sustainable Economic Welfare ...[+++]’, the ‘Genuine Progress Indicators’ or the ‘National Welfare Index’; recommends that Eurostat work in close cooperation with other research centres and organisations that have developed such indicators in order to make them more accurate and implementable;

3. Points out that, according to the Eurostat ‘at-risk-of poverty’ indicator, nearly 85 million persons in the European Union were at risk of poverty in 2008, and that according to the ‘material deprivation’ indicator it is estimated that the figure would rise to 120 million; considers that the Council's decision on poverty indicators may give rise to ambiguities concerning the overall reduction target of lifting 20 million persons out of poverty and exclusion by 2020 (reduction of 23.5 % according to Eurostat's ‘at-risk-of poverty indicator’, but only 16.7 % according to the ‘material deprivation’ indicator); stresses that those livin ...[+++]g in poverty are for the most part women, a situation brought about by unemployment, casual labour, low wages, pensions below the minimum subsistence level, and the widespread difficulty of obtaining access to good public services;

15. Suggests that, once the five basic indicators and the associated methodology have been sufficiently developed to produce results of high quality, the Commission should consider including in the Scoreboard additional long-term indicators such as those relating to market shares, quality, advertising, transparency and comparability of offers, indicators related to enforcement and consumer empowerment, social, environmental and ethical indicators, as well as indicators to measure redress and consumer detriment; considers, however, that this should be done gradually in order to ensure a focused and intelligible Scoreboard, with a view to ...[+++] ensuring a more comprehensive approach to consumer protection and enabling consumers to benefit fully from the advantages offered by the internal market;

PYLL helps to identify causes of deaths which occur in younger age groups and which could, in theory, be prevented or postponed.