Suchergebnisse

A common initiative of the European Parliament and the European Commission resulted in the unification of the rules governing lobbyists at EU level in June 2011. The aim of this paper is to fill the gap in the literature as regards evaluation of the new system of the EU Transparency Register using the CPI methodology and to generate a numerical value for the scheme for further comparative purposes. Detailed analysis of relevant documents indicates that the current EU scheme's index is 26, which mirrors its supposed low level of stringency. Thorough comparison with past regulatory schemes of the Parliament and Commission reveals that, surprisingly, it is the European Parliament which has made greater steps in lobby regulation, especially towards enhancing transparency in lobbying. Although the new scheme represents a compromise between both institutional approaches, regarding its individual elements, there is a clear dominance of the Commission's approach, which can be regarded as the true leader of reform. ; A common initiative of the European Parliament and the European Commission resulted in the unification of the rules governing lobbyists at EU level in June 2011. The aim of this paper is to fill the gap in the literature as regards evaluation of the new system of the EU Transparency Register using the CPI methodology and to generate a numerical value for the scheme for further comparative purposes. Detailed analysis of relevant documents indicates that the current EU scheme's index is 26, which mirrors its supposed low level of stringency. Thorough comparison with past regulatory schemes of the Parliament and Commission reveals that, surprisingly, it is the European Parliament which has made greater steps in lobby regulation, especially towards enhancing transparency in lobbying. Although the new scheme represents a compromise between both institutional approaches, regarding its individual elements, there is a clear dominance of the Commission's approach, which can be regarded as the true leader of reform.

The paper tries to show that the East enlargement was realized under partly changed conditions and strategies. It is focused on the enlargement waves formation including the European Commission position. The paper analyzes the classical method of EU enlargement and compares these principles with the undergoing EU expansion. In the end the attention is devoted to the special conditions in common agricultural policy they were offer to the candidate countries as the result of financial costs of the enlargement to the East.

In March 2020 the European Commission adopted exceptional state aid rules in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Its goal is to enable member states to support their economy using aid measures, which under current state aid rules are either not possible to be issued at all or only after time consuming notification procedures. This so-called Temporary Framework1 is being presented as a significant tool with several possibilities such as aid for research and development projects and research infrastructures. Since its adoption, dozens of measures across the whole European Union have been notified, using different sections of the Temporary Framework according to their focus. This article is concerned with the practical use and impact of such sections regarding R&D aid, with the underlying questions as to what extent the presentation of the Temporary Framework is justified.

Příspěvek přednesený profesorem Hubou, současným předsedou výboru pre pôdohospodárstvo a životné prostredie Národní rady SR, na česko-slovenské Konferenci o udržitelném rozvoji a ústupu v Olomouci (8.11. 2012) hodnotí vývoj v oblasti životního prostředí z perspektivy uplynulých 25 let (od r. 1987, kdy vznikla Zpráva komise OSN pro životní prostředí a rozvoj s názvem Naše společná budoucnost, tzv. Zpráva Brundtlandové), či dokonce 40 let (v r. 1972 se konala Stockholmská konference o životním prostředí člověka). Rekapituluje jeho nejdůležitější milníky, kterých byl autor aktivním účastníkem, a to na úrovni globální, evropské, a v rámci Slovenska – v období jeho významných celospolečenských proměn. Kam tento vývoj směřuje – to je řečnická otázka, jejíž odpověď stále méně ovlivňují ti, kterým na budoucnosti opravdu záleží.(Z príspevku na česko-slovenskej konferencii o udržateľnom rozvoji a ústupe v Olomouci, 8.11. 2012) ; This paper, presented by Professor Huba, the current Chairman of the Committee for Agriculture and the Environment of the National Council of the Slovak Republic, at the Czecho-Slovak Conference on Sustainable Development and Retreat in Olomouc (8 Nov 2012), evaluates the development in the environmental sphere from the perspective of the past 25 years (since 1987, when the report Our Common Future from the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development, known as the Brundtland Report, was published), or even 40 years (Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment was held in 1972). It recapitulates its major milestones, in which the author was actively involved at the global, European and Slovak levels at the time of a major society-wide transformation in Slovakia. Where this development leads is a rhetorical question the answer to which is less and less influenced by those to whom future really matters.