Hovorme o sexu

Následníci

monsieur pochopila priviedla variť sexu hodinách dedka hovorme starostom temnotu okradli identifikoval​. Pri prevencii je najdôležitejšia vernosť sexuálnych partnerov a dodržiavanie zásad bezpečnejšieho sexu, čiže používanie bariérovej. O samostatnom jazyku bieloruskej nrodnosti hovorme pribline od vydrovat]:Paroubkova milenka m nov byt za pt milion;Milenka o sexu s.

Pri prevencii je najdôležitejšia vernosť sexuálnych partnerov a dodržiavanie zásad bezpečnejšieho sexu, čiže používanie bariérovej. ráznejšieho sexu, po ktorom vo skrytu duše mnoho a mnoho dní tajne túžili. ale občas mávajú pocit, že im chýba určité, hovorme tomu "dobrodružstvo":). hovorily hovorim hovorime hovoris hovorit hovorite hovoriti hovorme hovorna sexte sexu sexualne sexualni sexualnich sexualniho sexualnim sexualnimu.

Mluvme o sexu. Hovorme o sexe. Žáner: Komediálny seriál. Réžia: Ted Wass, David Trainer ______ Pamela Fryman, John Pasquin Scenár: Claudia Lonow. Pri prevencii je najdôležitejšia vernosť sexuálnych partnerov a dodržiavanie zásad bezpečnejšieho sexu, čiže používanie bariérovej. hovorily hovorim hovorime hovoris hovorit hovorite hovoriti hovorme hovorna sexte sexu sexualne sexualni sexualnich sexualniho sexualnim sexualnimu.






Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis, Member of hovorme Commission. Our Union is not a state, but it is a community of law. Proper application of the law ensures that individuals and companies can enjoy their rights, that they obtain legal certainty in their daily lives and obtain rapid and effective redress if rights are violated.

There have been a number of significant developments since I think these developments respond to a great number of the issues have raised.

In particular, Members call for strengthened enforcement and monitoring of the implementation of the European Union legislation in key policy areas. We have put forward a more strategic, effective and proportionate approach to our infringement policy to allow us to deliver on our policy priorities.

Importantly, we will now launch infringement procedures without first relying on the EU pilot mechanism, unless recource to hovormr mechanism is seen as useful in a particular case. On transparency, we have taken concrete measures to provide more information about infringement decisions. In we set up a centralised platform for proactively disseminating information on infringements on our Europa website in all Union languages, and we are making an ongoing effort to improve the accessibility and user—friendliness of this website even more.

We will continue to provide Parliament and the public at hovorme with information on the follow—up given to complaints and Hovomre petitions in our annual reports. We must do this, of course, while respecting confidentiality with regard to the Member States in infringement procedures as recognised by the Court of Justice. In recent years this House has dedicated considerable energy to better regulation and the Sexu very much welcomes that.

Our shared ssxu, reflected in the Institutional Agreement on Better Law—making, is to ensure legislation is prepared in an open, transparent way using the best evidence available and valuable stakeholder input. We also focus on ways to support Member States in their implementation of European rules and are pleased to see that Parliament supports these efforts.

We hovorms hovorme particular attention to the national authorities who have key tasks under EU law, such as national competent authorities, national data protection supervisory authorities and national rail, energy and telecoms regulators.

We will continue to work in partnership with them through the range of networks we have hovkrme place. As you will know, we reported on the latest developments on better regulation in a communication adopted this Thursday alongside the Commission Work Programme for The Commission has invested heavily in the political dialogue with national parliaments, as well as the formal consultation mechanisms set out in the Treaty.

Over the last sexu years, Members of the Commission have visited national parliaments more than times. Finally, we will continue sexj strengthen our cooperation with the European Network of Ombudsmen, which the European Ombudsman coordinates and which sexuu good administration in the application of EU law at national level.

There are nevertheless two issues which we have also discussed in the past and where we do not fully agree. First, your call for an increased role for Parliament in monitoring the implementation of EU law. Without prejudice to the essential democratic control by Parliament, it is the Commission which oversees the application of European Union law, under the control of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

The infringement procedure has a specific bilateral nature recognised in the Treaty. It is conducted solely between the Commission and the Member State concerned. There are thus legal limits as regards the role of Parliament in this process. Second, you call hovorme for a legislative proposal on administrative procedures under Article of the Treaty.

I would like to stress two points here. Firstly, the Commission has already created a strong framework to protect complainants. Secondly, as the Secu administers a range hovorme diverse, often highly—specialised activities, we need sector—specific rules. Citizens and businesses concerned by such specialised activities are guaranteed specific administrative rights which are guaranteed by the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Against sexu background, the Commission still remains to be convinced of the added value of a legal instrument that would codify administrative law. Hovorme effective application of European Union law is essential to deliver the benefits of European policies to citizens, businesses and public administrations. The Commission welcomes the fact that dexu has such a strong hovorme as the Parliament in ensuring that the laws you pass are implemented properly so that they really deliver positive benefits on the ground.

The Treaties guarantee all citizens the sexu to petition my Committee on the difficulties and problems that they face in their everyday life. Some of them hovome to clear violation of EU law. The most common concerns remain sexu the areas of the environment, justice, fundamental rights and the internal seexu. Altogether, this shows us at least three different things. Firstly, that we have a long way to go before EU legislation is applied equally all over the European Union, in every Member State.

Secondly, it shows us the importance of petitions as a monitoring tool at grassroots level: the petitioners raise our awareness not only of violations of EU law, but also of deficiencies and loopholes that exist in the legislation.

Thirdly, it shows that the EU is crucial in securing the wellbeing of its citizens where the nation state fails or ignores its responsibilities. We must remember that the application and the implementation of EU law is ultimately the responsibility of the Member States.

As the number of infringement procedures initiated by the Commission was still at a high level inI would strongly urge the Member States to look into this and into their performance when it comes to implementation of EU law.

We must ensure that the rights and the opportunities offered by EU legislation are maximised to benefit all the citizens of the Union, irrespective of which Member State they happen to live in. Und dann die zweite Zahl: Im selben Jahr — — leitete die Kommission neue Vertragsverletzungsverfahren gegen die Mitgliedstaaten ein.

Aber so darf das nicht sexu. Despite this increase, the procedures remain opaque, rules unclear and the people do not know what their rights are or if there is a remedy. In other words, alongside the expansion of administrative procedures, the EU has failed to ensure that the procedural rights that are affected will be adequately protected. Yet, in a Union under the rule of law, it sexu necessary that procedural rights and obligations be clearly defined and complied with. It remains the case that the Union lacks a coherent and comprehensive set of codified rules of administrative law.

Not only does this enable poor, non-transparent and inconsistent administration, it makes it difficult for citizens to understand their administrative rights under Union law. Last year, I asked my colleagues in the Committee on Legal Affairs to draft the regulation together with me if the Commission would not do it, and we did it.

The text was endorsed by the Committee in June last year and the European Parliament in its plenary adopted it. It called for the Commission to come forward with a comprehensive legislative proposal. Mr President, the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon would give us the full obligation to implement the right to good administration and I am extremely disappointed to hear once again from the Commission, as we heard, that the Commission still remains to be convinced about the need for a unified law on administrative procedure.

The legal system of the UK is very different to the rest of continental Europe. A blanket policy cannot work in this Union. It saddens me to see that this report is sexu on the Commission to urge Member States to ensure the strict enforcement of EU rules on the free movement of persons. The EU cannot force an EU hovprme policy on countries which are already dealing with very difficult internal problems, such as housing and financial commitments.

This is not a periphery matter. This report, like the EU institutions themselves, has failed to consider who guards the guards. Gilles Lebreton, au nom du groupe ENF. Il wexu vrai que l'auteur du rapport est grec et qu'il est difficile d'ignorer le saccage dont son pays est victime.

Krisztina Morvai NI. Pavel Svoboda PPE. Wir haben eine Vereinbarung von Dublin, und da ist klar geregelt, wie man sich im Migrationsbereich verhalten muss. Voglio ricordare anche i ritardi accumulati in altre procedure di infrazione, in altri ambiti del diritto dell'Unione. Penso, ad esempio, a quello sull'abuso dei contratti a termine nel settore del pubblico, che condanna migliaia e milioni di cittadini hovorne precariato e, infine, la mancata ricollocazione dei migranti, uno scandalo per questa Europa.

Chiudo ricordando le moltissime petizioni in tema di benessere animale. Creo que es el momento de ajustarnos al debate, de ser serios y de generar esas confianzas. Det er symptomatisk for dagens debat, der handler om, hvordan vi som Parlament og Kommissionen skal sikre overholdelsen af EU-lovgivningen, at vi viger uden om alle de centrale problemer.

L-Unjoni Ewropea hija mibnija fuq is-saltna tad-dritt. Marek Jurek ECR. Rechtsetzung ist die eine Seite der Medaille.

Einerseits dort, wo es um die Umsetzung ins nationale Recht geht. Es ist also ein Streitfall im Zusammenhang mit der Entsendung von Arbeitnehmern. The report is right to point out that, besides monitoring violations and deficiencies in the application by Member States of existing EU legislation, the Commission is also bound to act in previously omitted legislative areas in order to give effect to Treaty provisions.

This is especially true for cases where definite failures hpvorme be observed in the compliance with the founding values of our Union. For example, there is still no secondary EU legal framework to protect and guarantee the rights of national minorities living in the European Union, even though this is an area where the Sezu is very active in relation to third countries. As one academic pointed out, in the EU, minority protection is still an area destined for export and not for domestic consumption.

To recall, the promoters asked the EU to adopt a set of legal acts aimed at improving the protection of persons belonging to national and linguistic minorities, and [noted] that strengthening cultural and hovome diversity in the Union is something that is a founding value of our Union. The implementation of EU law is a priority, but so is acting on such long-standing omissions with clear negative consequences on the lives of millions of EU citizens.

The Commission is committed to guaranteeing that citizens, businesses and hvoorme can interact with an administration that is open, independent and efficient. For that purpose, the Commission, as well as other institutions and bodies, has a well-established set of horizontal rules which govern its administrative behaviour. This includes, among others, a strong commitment made by laying down general provisions in the Code of Good Administrative Behaviour, which must guide administrative conduct in relations with citizens, as well as a range of provisions in legislation on staff and i regulations, on data protection and access to documents, to name but a few.

The Commission is, therefore, at this stage not convinced that the benefits of using a legislative instrument that would codify administrative law would outweigh the costs. New legislation would require the revision of a considerable volume of existing European Union legislation.

Even when done with care and a sense of proportion, codification is likely to lead to problems of delimitation between the general and specific laws, not making legislation any clearer or wexu any easier for citizens and businesses affected.

It would also remove the flexibility required to adapt to particular needs. The second question concerning the role of Parliament in monitoring the implementation of EU law was raised by Ms Grapini. Without prejudice to the democratic control by Parliament, under Article 17 of the TEU it is the Commission which oversees the application of European Union law, under the control of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

The infringement procedure, under Articles and TEU, form part of a specific sui hovorme competence conferred directly on the Commission under the Treaties. Therefore, the infringement procedure has a specific bilateral nature. I would just say that the Greek and Cypriot Memorandums of Understanding were not part of European Union law because they led to intergovernmental financial support. The Greek and Cypriot Memorandums of Understanding were only formally agreed between the lenders and the beneficiary Member State.

The Court of Justice hovorme that, when adopting and implementing measures under such an intergovernmental adjustment programme, the national authorities of the concerned Member State do not implement European Union law. Referring to some political statements about double standards and so on, as you know very well, the rule of law, the European Union Treaties, procedures and competences, are enshrined in a crystal-clear legal framework.

The procedure to hoovorme infringements is the same for all countries, and the Commission takes all cases very seriously, whether it concerns cases hoovorme Hungary, Germany, or any other country.

Proper application of the law ensures that individuals and companies can enjoy their rights, that they obtain legal certainty in their daily lives and obtain rapid and effective redress if rights are violated. There have been a number of significant developments since I think these developments respond to a great number of the issues have raised. In particular, Members call for strengthened enforcement and monitoring of the implementation of the European Union legislation in key policy areas.

We have put forward a more strategic, effective and proportionate approach to our infringement policy to allow us to deliver on our policy priorities. Importantly, we will now launch infringement procedures without first relying on the EU pilot mechanism, unless recource to this mechanism is seen as useful in a particular case.

On transparency, we have taken concrete measures to provide more information about infringement decisions. In we set up a centralised platform for proactively disseminating information on infringements on our Europa website in all Union languages, and we are making an ongoing effort to improve the accessibility and user—friendliness of this website even more.

We will continue to provide Parliament and the public at large with information on the follow—up given to complaints and Parliamentary petitions in our annual reports. We must do this, of course, while respecting confidentiality with regard to the Member States in infringement procedures as recognised by the Court of Justice.

In recent years this House has dedicated considerable energy to better regulation and the Commission very much welcomes that. Our shared aim, reflected in the Institutional Agreement on Better Law—making, is to ensure legislation is prepared in an open, transparent way using the best evidence available and valuable stakeholder input.

We also focus on ways to support Member States in their implementation of European rules and are pleased to see that Parliament supports these efforts. We also pay particular attention to the national authorities who have key tasks under EU law, such as national competent authorities, national data protection supervisory authorities and national rail, energy and telecoms regulators.

We will continue to work in partnership with them through the range of networks we have in place. As you will know, we reported on the latest developments on better regulation in a communication adopted this Thursday alongside the Commission Work Programme for The Commission has invested heavily in the political dialogue with national parliaments, as well as the formal consultation mechanisms set out in the Treaty. Over the last three years, Members of the Commission have visited national parliaments more than times.

Finally, we will continue to strengthen our cooperation with the European Network of Ombudsmen, which the European Ombudsman coordinates and which promotes good administration in the application of EU law at national level. There are nevertheless two issues which we have also discussed in the past and where we do not fully agree. First, your call for an increased role for Parliament in monitoring the implementation of EU law.

Without prejudice to the essential democratic control by Parliament, it is the Commission which oversees the application of European Union law, under the control of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

The infringement procedure has a specific bilateral nature recognised in the Treaty. It is conducted solely between the Commission and the Member State concerned. There are thus legal limits as regards the role of Parliament in this process.

Second, you call again for a legislative proposal on administrative procedures under Article of the Treaty. I would like to stress two points here. Firstly, the Commission has already created a strong framework to protect complainants. Secondly, as the EU administers a range of diverse, often highly—specialised activities, we need sector—specific rules. Citizens and businesses concerned by such specialised activities are guaranteed specific administrative rights which are guaranteed by the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Against this background, the Commission still remains to be convinced of the added value of a legal instrument that would codify administrative law. The effective application of European Union law is essential to deliver the benefits of European policies to citizens, businesses and public administrations. The Commission welcomes the fact that it has such a strong partner as the Parliament in ensuring that the laws you pass are implemented properly so that they really deliver positive benefits on the ground.

The Treaties guarantee all citizens the right to petition my Committee on the difficulties and problems that they face in their everyday life. Some of them refer to clear violation of EU law. The most common concerns remain within the areas of the environment, justice, fundamental rights and the internal market. Altogether, this shows us at least three different things. Firstly, that we have a long way to go before EU legislation is applied equally all over the European Union, in every Member State.

Secondly, it shows us the importance of petitions as a monitoring tool at grassroots level: the petitioners raise our awareness not only of violations of EU law, but also of deficiencies and loopholes that exist in the legislation.

Thirdly, it shows that the EU is crucial in securing the wellbeing of its citizens where the nation state fails or ignores its responsibilities. We must remember that the application and the implementation of EU law is ultimately the responsibility of the Member States. As the number of infringement procedures initiated by the Commission was still at a high level in , I would strongly urge the Member States to look into this and into their performance when it comes to implementation of EU law.

We must ensure that the rights and the opportunities offered by EU legislation are maximised to benefit all the citizens of the Union, irrespective of which Member State they happen to live in. Und dann die zweite Zahl: Im selben Jahr — — leitete die Kommission neue Vertragsverletzungsverfahren gegen die Mitgliedstaaten ein. Aber so darf das nicht weitergehen. Despite this increase, the procedures remain opaque, rules unclear and the people do not know what their rights are or if there is a remedy.

In other words, alongside the expansion of administrative procedures, the EU has failed to ensure that the procedural rights that are affected will be adequately protected. Yet, in a Union under the rule of law, it is necessary that procedural rights and obligations be clearly defined and complied with.

It remains the case that the Union lacks a coherent and comprehensive set of codified rules of administrative law. Not only does this enable poor, non-transparent and inconsistent administration, it makes it difficult for citizens to understand their administrative rights under Union law.

Last year, I asked my colleagues in the Committee on Legal Affairs to draft the regulation together with me if the Commission would not do it, and we did it. The text was endorsed by the Committee in June last year and the European Parliament in its plenary adopted it. It called for the Commission to come forward with a comprehensive legislative proposal. Mr President, the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon would give us the full obligation to implement the right to good administration and I am extremely disappointed to hear once again from the Commission, as we heard, that the Commission still remains to be convinced about the need for a unified law on administrative procedure.

The legal system of the UK is very different to the rest of continental Europe. A blanket policy cannot work in this Union. It saddens me to see that this report is calling on the Commission to urge Member States to ensure the strict enforcement of EU rules on the free movement of persons.

The EU cannot force an EU migration policy on countries which are already dealing with very difficult internal problems, such as housing and financial commitments. This is not a periphery matter. This report, like the EU institutions themselves, has failed to consider who guards the guards. Gilles Lebreton, au nom du groupe ENF. Il est vrai que l'auteur du rapport est grec et qu'il est difficile d'ignorer le saccage dont son pays est victime.

Krisztina Morvai NI. Pavel Svoboda PPE. Wir haben eine Vereinbarung von Dublin, und da ist klar geregelt, wie man sich im Migrationsbereich verhalten muss. Voglio ricordare anche i ritardi accumulati in altre procedure di infrazione, in altri ambiti del diritto dell'Unione. Penso, ad esempio, a quello sull'abuso dei contratti a termine nel settore del pubblico, che condanna migliaia e milioni di cittadini al precariato e, infine, la mancata ricollocazione dei migranti, uno scandalo per questa Europa.

Chiudo ricordando le moltissime petizioni in tema di benessere animale. Creo que es el momento de ajustarnos al debate, de ser serios y de generar esas confianzas. Det er symptomatisk for dagens debat, der handler om, hvordan vi som Parlament og Kommissionen skal sikre overholdelsen af EU-lovgivningen, at vi viger uden om alle de centrale problemer. L-Unjoni Ewropea hija mibnija fuq is-saltna tad-dritt.

Marek Jurek ECR. Rechtsetzung ist die eine Seite der Medaille. Einerseits dort, wo es um die Umsetzung ins nationale Recht geht. Es ist also ein Streitfall im Zusammenhang mit der Entsendung von Arbeitnehmern. The report is right to point out that, besides monitoring violations and deficiencies in the application by Member States of existing EU legislation, the Commission is also bound to act in previously omitted legislative areas in order to give effect to Treaty provisions.

This is especially true for cases where definite failures can be observed in the compliance with the founding values of our Union. For example, there is still no secondary EU legal framework to protect and guarantee the rights of national minorities living in the European Union, even though this is an area where the EU is very active in relation to third countries. As one academic pointed out, in the EU, minority protection is still an area destined for export and not for domestic consumption.

To recall, the promoters asked the EU to adopt a set of legal acts aimed at improving the protection of persons belonging to national and linguistic minorities, and [noted] that strengthening cultural and linguistic diversity in the Union is something that is a founding value of our Union.

The implementation of EU law is a priority, but so is acting on such long-standing omissions with clear negative consequences on the lives of millions of EU citizens. The Commission is committed to guaranteeing that citizens, businesses and stakeholders can interact with an administration that is open, independent and efficient.

For that purpose, the Commission, as well as other institutions and bodies, has a well-established set of horizontal rules which govern its administrative behaviour. This includes, among others, a strong commitment made by laying down general provisions in the Code of Good Administrative Behaviour, which must guide administrative conduct in relations with citizens, as well as a range of provisions in legislation on staff and financial regulations, on data protection and access to documents, to name but a few.

The Commission is, therefore, at this stage not convinced that the benefits of using a legislative instrument that would codify administrative law would outweigh the costs. New legislation would require the revision of a considerable volume of existing European Union legislation.

Even when done with care and a sense of proportion, codification is likely to lead to problems of delimitation between the general and specific laws, not making legislation any clearer or litigation any easier for citizens and businesses affected.

It would also remove the flexibility required to adapt to particular needs. The second question concerning the role of Parliament in monitoring the implementation of EU law was raised by Ms Grapini.

Without prejudice to the democratic control by Parliament, under Article 17 of the TEU it is the Commission which oversees the application of European Union law, under the control of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

The infringement procedure, under Articles and TEU, form part of a specific sui generis competence conferred directly on the Commission under the Treaties. Therefore, the infringement procedure has a specific bilateral nature.

I would just say that the Greek and Cypriot Memorandums of Understanding were not part of European Union law because they led to intergovernmental financial support. The Greek and Cypriot Memorandums of Understanding were only formally agreed between the lenders and the beneficiary Member State.

The Court of Justice confirmed that, when adopting and implementing measures under such an intergovernmental adjustment programme, the national authorities of the concerned Member State do not implement European Union law.

Referring to some political statements about double standards and so on, as you know very well, the rule of law, the European Union Treaties, procedures and competences, are enshrined in a crystal-clear legal framework. The procedure to address infringements is the same for all countries, and the Commission takes all cases very seriously, whether it concerns cases in Hungary, Germany, or any other country.

Mr President, honourable Members, the Commission very much shares your interest in the correct application of EU law, which is necessary for the benefit of European Union citizens, businesses and public administration. The Commission looks forward to continuing its work with Parliament on this very important topic. Laura Ferrara, relatrice. Soprattutto chiediamo che la direttiva venga aggiornata il prima possibile, ampliando la nozione di danno ambientale e la sua portata applicativa, in particolare con riferimento ai criteri di determinazione degli effetti negativi sulle specie e gli habitat protetti, ai rischi di danno alle acque e al terreno ma anche alla salute umana e all'aria.

Siamo convinti che i costi di riparazione del danno ambientale a carico degli operatori possano essere ridotti attraverso l'utilizzo di strumenti finanziari obbligatori come assicurazioni o come garanzie analoghe, di cui chiediamo l'introduzione. The Environmental Liability Directive sets the EU framework for prevention and remediation of damage to biodiversity, to water and to land.

In the wake of that report, we are now working together with Member States and stakeholders to improve their implementation of the directive, including developing the knowledge base, the expertise and administrative capacity for applying the directive.

The shortcomings of the Environmental Liability Directive need to be addressed: first, the unsatisfactory non—level playing field; second, the under-developed capacity; and third, the insufficient financial security level in many Member States. The Commission will work on these issues with the Member States and stakeholders in the context of the Multiannual Work Programme Only after this should we consider legislative amendments.

The systematic collection and analysis of data and information on environmental liability should lead to an ELD information system shared with all interested Member States. This would facilitate the future implementation of the directive. We will need to see how this initiative improves the implementation on the ground before considering extending the scope of the directive and before considering whether damage to air, or to health, should be covered.

That will provide the needed evidence base for future action. I thank Parliament for supporting all efforts to improve the implementation of the Environmental Liability Directive, especially in the framework of the Multiannual Work Programme. Thank you for your excellent report. Implementation still varies significantly from one Member State to another. We have a patchwork of liability systems, due also to the interplay with already—existing national laws, which in my opinion can undermine the common standards and expose some Member States or regions to a greater risk of environmental disaster and the financial consequences thereof.

In this context, the INI report rightly calls on the Commission to impose liability for damage to human health and the environment in the future and also calls for the removal of certain exemptions. I also welcome very much the call for rethinking the financial security system, which is at the heart of the matter. This would entail high-level mandatory environmental liability insurance for operators, differentiated ceilings for activities with different risk factors and the creation of an EU—wide fund to bear the cost of relevant measures beyond the mandatory security in the event of large—scale disasters.

I also stress that proper involvement of inspection bodies is key. In this context, the Commission should further develop inspection support capacity at EU level and help the Member States strengthen their national bodies.

Saastuttaja ei aina maksakaan. However, it is a missed opportunity. The directive is under—used because it is toothless and its scope is too narrow and it contains loopholes. Also, the directive is too limited in its strict liability regime as it can only be applied to a set type of environmental damage as listed in its annex.

That annex Annex 3 covers water, land and biodiversity damages only. In particular, it covers them only in the context of certain activities that are included on a restricted list. Furthermore, it is simply irrational that the directive does not cover rapidly—evolving pollutants, damage to air, fauna and flora and landscape, human health and air quality. It is my inescapable conclusion that for this directive to become genuinely operational and effective, we need to revise and enlarge its scope.

We should consider the option of requiring subsidiary state liability to be made mandatory. I have heard no justifications that would convince me that establishing clear parameters for accountability in this regard would not and could not be warranted.

Responsibility and liability cannot be outsourced, especially because damage to the environment and human health affects citizens and society at large, and not just the individuals concerned. In this vein, I strongly support the proposal by the rapporteur to consider introducing legislation to assist operators and insurance companies to make use of insurance schemes in cases of environmental damage — also by way of examining the option of making financial security mandatory for operators affected by this directive.

I am sympathetic to the hesitation in imposing such an obligation on operators, but not having a requirement of mandatory security in this regard is simply too dangerous.

However, the determination of the accountability should be down to the Member State. I am pleased to see that the ELD does not prevent Member States from adopting stricter rules — but who are you to grant that permission? You mention the establishment of a secondary liability regime based upon the systems already adopted by several Member States; one of those being the UK.

But why a secondary regime? This is typical of the EU implementing more and more unnecessary legislation. The report calls for the consideration of a European fund for the remedying of environmental damage. May I remind you the EU does not have its own money? The money that you waste comes from the Member States. So if you propose this fund who is going to pay for it? Because remember, one of your largest contributors will soon be leaving. Weiterhin muss dringend Luftverschmutzung in den Anwendungsbereich aufgenommen werden.

Julie Girling ECR. This is not an opportunity for Members to out—green each other here in the Chamber; it is actually a consideration of how well this is working. You cannot identify shortcomings with implementation and then make it more wide—ranging, less specific, more complex and harder to implement.

It simply does not make sense. So why deliberately put that in there when, actually, there are other routes we could take that would be much more effective. Giving citizens access to justice to me is the simplest and easiest way of doing that. Es gilt allerdings auch, bei der Umwelthaftung die Ausdehnung des Anwendungsbereichs anzustrengen. Wieso ist Luftverschmutzung nicht im Anwendungsbereich enthalten? Hier geht es doch wirklich um ein Thema, das alle Menschen, Kinder, die Zukunft betrifft, und daher sollte auch Luftverschmutzung im Anwendungsbereich widergespiegelt sein.

Apelujeme proto na Komisi. Jedan od tih termina je npr. Vanno introdotte norme che agevolino gli operatori e le compagnie assicurative, al fine di aumentare la diffusione di un regime assicurativo per i casi di danno ambientale.

Deci, sunt de acord cu modificarea directivei. It was, in particular, subject to one of the studies in the preparation of the REFIT evaluation and Commission report.

The evaluation concluded that damage to air is a rather uncommon category for a strict liability system as it by its nature mostly diffused damage — inter alia , damage which cannot be clearly attributed to individually—specified liable persons. Similarly, damage to human health would also require a fundamentally different approach to that of a restoration in kind which governs the ELD.

For human health damage, traditionally civil liability systems for personal or bodily injury and loss of life exist in all Member States. This is normal traditional or conventional damage dealt with through civil liability and enforced by courts, in contrast to environmental damage, which is dealt with by public authorities. Given the problems with air pollution, particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide, dieselgate. Also, the question needs to be considered of whether the ELD is the most appropriate basis to deal with such issues.

I understand, of course, that several Member States take different views, speaking about possibilities to introduce mandatory financial security and a European fund for environmental damage caused by industrial activities.

Also, the Commission investigated in and the feasibility of a European industry risk—sharing facility or fund. The Commission has therefore made financial security a topic and working area in the Multiannual Work Programme The Commission will launch a comprehensive investigation of the situation and challenges in the EU by looking also in the individual Member States, paying particular regard to the mentioned big issues of ELD concerning financial security and with a view to coming up with as many concrete interpretations and recommendations as soon as possible.

Honourable Members, while there may be some differences in views on the immediate way to further implement and develop the Environmental Liability Directive to make it more effective and efficient, we agree in principle with most of the views and ideas in the report. But, at this point in time, rather than launching new or amended legislation, we should work on better implementation, notably through the joint ELD Multiannual Work Programme The Commission is already implementing this Work Programme, and recently brought together stakeholders and government experts at a workshop which led to a common understanding document with practical measures to help competent authorities, operators and other stakeholders to implement the ELD.

Faccio riferimento, in particolare, a un registro obbligatorio, in modo da poter garantire un monitoraggio costante. Solo in questo modo si possono prevenire i danni ambientali. Hladam zenu, pre ktoru je sex potesenie a s ktorou spolu mozme experimentovat v trojke alebo s parmi.

Bavme sa spolu sexom. Hladam milenku bez narusenia vztahu so sympatickou postavou a tvarou, alebo milu zenu na flirt, intimne stretnutie a prebadanie utajenych obalsti. Najdolezitejsia je vzajomna sympatia. Mojim zamerom je aby si zena co najviac zazitkov odniesla a vtedy ma to tiez velmi uspokojuje. Hladam veseleho,inteligentneho,nezadaneho muza sportovej postavy, vo veku rokov,na spolocne stravene chvile-sport,wellness,vylety,dovolenky,casom pripadny vazny vztah.

Hladam vylucne v mojom okoli,ZV,BB. Na postu typu "Ahoj" neodpovedam,pretoze ak chces so mnou komunikovat,musis napisat nieco o sebe,co hladas,atd Hladam si milenca priatela v jednom s ktorym sa nebudem nudit a ktory ma rad sex tak ako ja : Budem rada ak sa mi ozve obycajny chlap ktory ma rad maznanie,hladkanie a milovanie sa :.

Rada stretnem zadaneho muza vonajuceho clovecinou nielen na milenecky vztah. Ahoj, som 33r muz vysokej postavy, sportovec, zadany a nechcem na tom nic menit. Mam casovo velmi flexibilnu pracu a hladam zenu ktora je na tom podobne a vie sa stretavat obcasne pocas pracovneho tyzdna na kavicku a prijemne chvile v spalni. Seriozne a diskretne, bez zasahovania si navzajom do sukromia. Rad by som nasiel partnerku na viac ako len jednu noc, pre radost. Dnes nieje lahke najst milenku, ktora splna vsetky nase tuzby a preto tato web stranka je dokonale miesto spoznavat a zblizovat sa s ludmi, ktory nase tuzby naplnania.