generally accepted standards for review engagements | general review standards | review engagement standards | review standards | standards applicable to review engagements

Occupational Health Evaluation Standard

Interprovincial Standards and Examination Committee

Standards Advice Review Group

BTWC Review Conference | Review Conference of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention | Review Conference of the Biological Weapons Convention | Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction

produce

Range of process issues relating to consumer assurance schemes identified by the European Economic and Social Committee:a) Scheme Governance Where does ultimate control of the scheme lie?b) Scheme Goals Are the goals clearly defined?c) Scheme scope Does the scheme address the "problem" as normally defined?d) Scheme standards or terms Do the standards set and monitored by the scheme express the goals? e) Impact assessment Is there credible assessment of the impact of the scheme on the goals?f) Independent review Is there any independent review of the scheme's operation?g) Cost-benefit analysis Is there any process to monitor and evaluate ...[+++]the costs of the scheme borne by suppliers, traders and consumers in comparison to the progress made to achieve the goals?h) Public claims Do the public claims by certified companies or suppliers match the goals, standards and outcomes of the scheme?

whereas the scrutiny period provided for under Article 13(1) of the ESMA Regulation is three months from the date of notification of the RTS, unless the RTS adopted by the Commission are the same as the draft RTS adopted by ESMA, in which case the scrutiny period would be one month.

8. Points out that in the recently adopted Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) and Capital Requirements Directive (CRD) the time period for scrutinising RTS may be extended by a further month given their volume and complexity, and considers that this kind of flexibility should become a general rule; considers that deadlines for objections by Parliament to delegated acts adopted by the Commission need to be sufficiently long to allow for the full exercise of Parliament’s rights of scrutiny, taking into account the plenary calendar and workload; takes the view that the standard deadline of two months, extendable by two months, as provided for the in the Common Understanding is not sufficiently long for complex matters and extensive delega ...[+++]ted acts, which call for a longer scrutiny period to be set; recalls that the co-legislator has full discretion regarding the period of scrutiny to be set in the basic act; stresses, in this regard, that where the Common Understanding provides guidelines in relation to deadlines, it is in no way binding and therefore does not limit the legislator in this respect; points out that the legislator has set a period of scrutiny of three months, extendable by three months, for all delegated acts in the area of financial services, and considers that this practice should be extended to other areas of a complex nature;

82. Urges the EU and its Member States to ensure that the ICPD+20 operational review process results in a comprehensive review of all aspects related to the full enjoyment of sexual and reproductive rights, that it reaffirms a strong and progressive approach to sexual and reproductive rights for all that is consistent with international human rights standards, and that it increases the accountability of governments for achieving the agreed objectives; calls, in particular, on the EU and its Member States to ensure that the review process is conducted in a participatory manner and that it provides an opportunity for different stakeholders, including civil society a ...[+++]s well as women, adolescents and young people, to participate in a meaningful manner; recalls that the framework for such a review must be based on human rights and have a specific focus on sexual and reproductive rights;