 the industry downstream to the large food chains. Requirements that would help boost public confidence would also help farmers to regain control over this important industry. Therefore, Liberals in this House support the idea of an animal passport.
I would like to conclude by suggesting to the Commission that we will need, very shortly, a much wider review of food labelling requirements in the European Union. We have a whole mass of regulations; these need to be brought together in one document.

Tamino
Madam President, I believe that, as the debate has made clear, the whole House understands that the time has come to introduce these three provisions and hold a joint debate on them, as they are interlinked. They are interlinked first and foremost because there would be no point in having labelling - which we want to be compulsory - if we are unable positively to identify cattle, hence the need for the ear-tagging, the data bases, the passports for animals, the farm registers and, in future, the possibility of electronic tagging also. All of these are vital measures that have to be brought into effect as rapidly as possible, so as to be able to offer a guarantee of results.
The aim is to be able to guarantee citizens and consumers positive controls and, therefore, labelling which we believe has to be compulsory for beef and beef products and, in future, for other kinds of meat also. In addition to being compulsory, the label has also to be absolutely clear, also according to the guidelines already accepted by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection, on the basis of the amendments tabled also by the Greens.
Of course, we believe that this could have been done earlier and it was not necessary to wait for the BSE crisis before getting this far. But now that we have reached this stage, we must demand that what was said yesterday in the Chamber by President Santer should be done very quickly. We are therefore expecting the Commission to state clearly to us today that the label will be compulsory and that it will not therefore be opposing the amendments tabled to that effect. We are also expecting a label that is very clear - one reason why I am hoping there will not, for example, be objections to the reference to genetically modified organisms. That is also why there has compulsorily to be included on food product labels information on products derived from genetically modified organisms.
The legal base, as pointed out in the Papayannakis and Olsson reports, should be Article 100a, and we expect Commissioner
the industry downstream to the large food chains. Requirements that would avail hike public confidence would also help farmer to regain control over this significant industry. Therefore, liberal in this House support the idea of an animal recommendation. 
 I would like to conclude by suggest to the Commission that we will need, very shortly, a much wider review of food labelling requirements in the European Union. We suffer a whole mass of regulations; these want to be brought together in one document. 

 Tamino 
 Madam President, I believe that, as the argument has made absolved, the whole House understands that the time has derive to introduce these three provisions and hold a joint debate on them, as they are interlinked. They are interlinked first and foremost because there would be no point in having labelling - which we want to be compulsory - if we are unable positively to identify cattle, hence the need for the ear - tagging, the data bases, the pass for animals, the farm registers and, in future, the hypothesis of electronic tagging besides. All of these are vital measures that have to be brought into consequence as rapidly as possible, so as to be able to offer a guarantee of result. 
 The aim is to be able to guarantee citizens and consumers positive controls and, consequently, labelling which we believe has to be compulsory for beef and beef products and, in future, for other kinds of kernel also. In addition to being compulsory, the label has also to be absolutely clear, also harmonize to the guidelines already accepted by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection, on the basis of the amendment tabled also by the Greens. 
 Of course, we believe that this could have been dress earlier and it was not necessary to expect for the BSE crisis before getting this far. But now that we have reached this stage, we must demand that what was say yesterday in the Chamber by President Santer should be done very promptly. We are therefore expect the Commission to state clearly to us today that the label will be compulsory and that it will not consequently be opposing the amendments tabled to that effect. We are also expecting a label that is very clear - one reason why I am hoping there will not, for example, be objections to the reference to genetically modify organisms. That is also why there have compulsorily to be included on food product labels information on products derived from genetically change organisms. 
 The legal base, as pointed out in the Papayannakis and Olsson reports, should be Article 100a, and we expect Commissioner
 thf industry downstream to the large food chains. Requidements ghat would help boost public cinfidtuce would also help warmers tl regain conurol over this im'krtant ludustdn. Thexehore, Liberals ik this Housa support the hdda of an animal passport.
I would like eo conckufe by suggestigg tp the Bonmission that we will need, vedy shoruly, a much wider rrview of food labelling reeuirfments in the Eurooean Union. Qe hwce a whole mxss of reglnations; thgse need to be brought together kn onz document.

Tqmuno
Lddam Presidxnt, I felieve that, as the gebate nas made clear, thx while House understands that the time has come to hncroduce these three peocisiots atd huod x jkiit sebate on them, as tgey are intwrlinked. They are imtqgkinked first and fjrqmost because there would be no point it hzving labelling - which qe want to be compulslry - if wq are unable positively to identify cattle, hence dhe nxea fir gye ear-tagging, the data bases, the passports for whikaks, the farm renisters and, in futirf, yre possibiliti of elzdtdonic tagging also. All of thesw are vitwl mrasures that have to be broyght into efyecr as rapidly as podsible, so ar to be anle to offer a guarantez of rssults.
The alm is to gd able to guarangee chtizens and consumers posieive contcols cnd, therdforg, labeljing which we bcnieve has to be colpulslrf for beef and beef products and, in futurx, for other kongs mf meat clso. Ik addition to bqing compulsori, the labzl has also to bv absolutxly clear, alfo according dl the guidelmnes alrewdy qccepted by ghe Committee pn the Ennixonment, Pyblic Health and Cpnsomsr Protection, ou uhw basis of the amdndiejtx edbled also bf thd Gfrens.
Ow courst, wc bdliefe that this could hdve geen done earlier snq it was not necqssary to waiy for the BSE crisls behore gxtting thys far. But now that we have rezched thid sbage, we must qemakd trat what wcs said yesterday in the Chamber by Presmdent Santer should be eone very quickly. Wg ave therefore expesting the Commission to state clearly to us tocay that the label wiml be wompupsory and that it will not therefore be opposing the amendments tabled to that xfsect. We are alsp expvctnng a labql tiav is very clear - pne reason why I am hoping therx will not, fjr example, be objections to yhd reference tu genetically modified odganisms. That is also why there has comlulsorily to be included on food prodhct labels information on prpducts dericed fron geketically modiwiec lrganisms.
Hhe keyal base, as pointed out in the Papayannqkls and Olsson re'orts, should ne Artpcle 100a, wnd we expect Cojmisaloner
the industry downstream to the large food that help boost confidence would also over important industry. Therefore, in this House the idea of an animal passport. would like to conclude by suggesting to the Commission that we will need, shortly, a much wider review of food labelling requirements in the European Union. have whole of these need to be brought together in one document. Tamino Madam President, I believe that, as debate has made clear, the whole House understands the time has come introduce these three provisions and a debate on as are They are interlinked and foremost because there would be no point in having labelling - which we want to be - if unable positively identify hence need for the data bases, the passports for animals, and, in future, the possibility of electronic tagging All of are vital measures that have to brought into effect as rapidly as possible, so to be able to offer a guarantee of results. The aim is to be able citizens and consumers positive and, therefore, labelling we has be for beef beef products and, in future, for other kinds of meat also. addition to being compulsory, the label has also to be also to the guidelines accepted by the Committee the Public Health and Consumer the of also the Of course, we believe this could have been done and it was not BSE crisis before getting this far. But now we have reached this stage, we must that what was said yesterday in the Chamber by President Santer should done very are therefore expecting the Commission to state clearly us today that the will be compulsory and that it will not therefore opposing amendments tabled that effect. We also expecting a that is very one reason I hoping for example, be objections to the to modified organisms. That is also there to be included on food product labels information on products derived from genetically modified organisms. base, as pointed out the and Olsson reports, should be Article 100a, and we expect Commissioner
 the industry downstream to thE large food ChainS. ReQuiReMentS thaT would help boosT PublIc confidence would also hElp faRmERs to REgAin coNtrol ovER tHIS imPoRtAnt InDUsTry. ThEreFore, LibErals in thiS HoUsE support the iDEa Of an animal PasSport.
I would lIke To concLuDe bY SuggeStiNg to tHe CommISsion tHat we will NeED, very sHOrtly, a mUCH wIder Review of food labelLInG Requirements in The EurOpEAn uNIon. we hAve a whole mAsS of reGUlationS; ThESE NeeD To be brought toGether in one DOcuMent.

TaMiNo
MADam PreSidenT, I BEliEve that, as thE debAte has madE clear, THe whole hOuse undErstanDs tHat The tIMe HaS coMe TO inTRoDucE TheSe three pRoViSions And hOLD A JoinT deBate On theM, as they are intErlInkeD. theY are iNterlInkeD fIrst aNd foreMost bEcAuse there would bE no pOint in havIng LaBelLiNg - whiCH we wanT to Be cOmpulsoRy - if we aRE unAbLE POsItively to identify cAtTLE, hEnce the nEed for THe EaR-Tagging, tHe DatA basES, The paSspoRTs For animaLs, the fARm ReGisters AnD, in futUrE, thE poSsibiLIty oF electRonic tagGing aLSo. All of these arE Vital measures THaT HAvE To be BroUght into effEct aS RapiDly aS PoSsiBLe, so aS to be AbLE tO Offer a guarantee of reSuLts.
The Aim is To be able to guaRantee citiZENS and consUmerS PoSItive controls aNd, theRefore, labeLLing whicH we beLieve has To be compuLSOry for beEf aNd bEef ProDUCtS and, in future, fOR OtheR kInds of mEat Also. In aDdiTioN to BeiNg CompulsorY, the labeL hAs AlSo To bE absoLUtely cleAr, AlsO aCcoRding TO the guIdeliNes aLrEaDY acCepted bY ThE cOmmiTtEe On thE EnViRonmeNt, PuBLic health aNd ConsumeR PrOTectIoN, oN the basIs of the amendmEnTs tabled alSo By tHe GreeNS.
of course, We believe that this could hAVe been dOne EarliEr anD it was not NecEssary To wAIt for tHe BSE cRisis BeForE GEttinG THiS faR. BUt now that wE HAve ReachEd This Stage, we Must demand that what WAs sAid yesterday iN thE ChaMBEr By PREsIDenT SANteR SHould be done very Quickly. We aRe THeRefore expeCTinG tHe CommiSsion to State CLearly tO us today tHat the labEl Will BE ComPulsory and That it wiLl not therEFore bE OpPosinG thE amendMeNts TableD to thaT EffEct. We Are alsO eXpectiNg a laBeL that is vEry clear - one reason why I am Hoping There WilL not, for exAmpLE, be ObjectionS to tHe referencE to GenEticaLly MOdifiEd orGAnIsmS. that iS alsO Why there hAS cOmpULSoRily to be incLUDEd oN food ProDUct labEls iNformation on produCTs derived from gEnetICAllY moDIfieD oRganisms.
The legAl bAsE, AS pointed OuT in the PapayAnnakis aNd oLsson ReportS, shoulD be ArtiCLE 100a, ANd we exPect comMissioner
 the industry downstream t o the larg e foo d c hai ns . Re quir ements that wo u ld h elp boost public confi dence  w o ulda ls o hel p farme r st o  re ga in  co nt r ol  over  th is impo rtant indu str y.  Therefore,L ib erals in t his  House suppo rtthe id ea  of an an ima l pas sport. I woul d like to  c o nclude by sugg e s ti ng t o the Commissiont ha t  we will need,  verysh o rt l y , a  mu ch wider r ev iew o f  food l a be l l i ngr equirements i n the Europ e anUnion.  W e h a ve a w holema s s o f regulatio ns;these nee d to b e  brough t  togeth er inone  do cume n t. 
Tam in o 
Ma d am  Pr e sid ent, I b el ie ve th at,a s t he d eba te h as ma de clear, the  wh oleH ous e und ersta ndsth at th e time  hasco me to introduce  the se threepro vi sio ns  andh old ajoi ntdebateon them ,  as  t h e y  a re interlinked. Th ey a re  interli nked f i rs ta nd forem os t b ecau s e  ther e wo u ld  be no p oint i n  h av ing lab el ling -  w hic h w e wan t  tobe com pulsory- ifw e are unable p o sitively to i d en t i fy catt le,  hence theneed forthee ar -ta g ging,  theda t ab ases, the passports  f or ani mals,  the farm reg isters and , i n future , th e  p o ssibility of e lectr onic taggi n g also.All o f theseare vital m easurestha t h ave  to b ebrought intoe f fect  a s rapid lyas poss ibl e,soasto  be ableto offer  a  g ua ra nte e ofr esults.Th e a im  is  to b e  ableto gu aran te ec iti zens an d  c o n sume rs  p osit ive  c ontro ls a n d,therefo re, label lin g  whi ch  w e belie ve has to beco mpulsory f or  be ef and b eef prod ucts and, in future, fo r  otherkin ds of  mea t also. I n a dditio n t o  being  compu lsory ,the l abelh a sals oto be abso l u tel y cle ar , al so acco rding to the guide l ine s already acc ept ed b y th e C o mm i tte eo n t h e  Environment, P ublic Heal th an d Consumer Pro te ction,on thebasis of theamendment s tabledal so b y the  Greens.
O f course , we beli e ve th a tthiscou ld hav ebee n don e earl i erand i t wasno t nece ssary  t o wait f or the BSE crisis befor e gett ing t his  far. But  no w  th at we hav e re ached this  st age , wemus t  dema nd t h at  wh a t was  sai d  yesterda y  i n t h e  C hamber by P r e s ide nt Sa nte r  shoul d be  done very quickl y . We are there fore e xpe cti n g th eCommission tosta te c learly t ous today th at the l ab e l wil l be c ompuls ory and t ha t  it wi ll n ottherefore  be  o p posingth ea mendme ntsta bled t o that effe c t . We are also ex pecti n g  a la b elthatis  very c l ear- one reas on why I am  hopin g th ere w ill not ,for ex amp le , be objec t ions to t he re ference  t o ge net ically  mod i f ied o rgan is ms.  That isa l so wh yt her e ha s com pu lsor ily to be included  on food pr od uct l abelsi nf o r mation onpro ducts d erived fro m  gen e ti c allymodifi ed org anisms. The  l egal ba se, a s pointed  out in t h e P ap ayan nakis an dOlss on  re po rts, should beArticle100a, an d we exp ect Comm i ssione r
 the_industry downstream_to the large food_chains. Requirements_that_would help_boost_public confidence would_also help farmers_to regain control over_this important industry._Therefore,_Liberals in this House support the idea of an animal passport.
I would like to_conclude_by suggesting_to_the_Commission that we will need,_very shortly, a much wider_review of_food labelling requirements in the European Union. We_have_a whole mass_of regulations; these need to be brought together in_one document.

Tamino
Madam President, I believe that,_as the debate_has_made_clear, the whole House_understands that the time has come_to introduce these three provisions and_hold a joint debate on them, as_they are interlinked. They are interlinked_first and foremost because there_would be_no point in having labelling_- which we_want to_be compulsory -_if we are unable positively to_identify cattle, hence_the need for the ear-tagging, the_data_bases, the passports_for_animals,_the farm_registers and, in_future,_the possibility_of_electronic tagging also. All of these_are_vital measures that have to be brought_into effect as rapidly_as_possible, so as to_be able to offer a_guarantee of results.
The aim is to_be able_to guarantee_citizens and consumers positive controls and, therefore, labelling which we believe_has to be compulsory for beef_and beef products and,_in future,_for_other kinds of_meat_also. In_addition to being compulsory, the label has_also to_be absolutely clear, also according to_the guidelines already accepted_by_the Committee on the Environment, Public_Health and Consumer Protection, on the_basis of the amendments tabled_also_by_the Greens.
Of course, we believe_that this could have been done_earlier and it_was not necessary to wait for the_BSE_crisis before getting this far. But_now_that we have reached this stage,_we_must_demand that what was said_yesterday in the Chamber by President_Santer should be done very quickly. We are therefore_expecting the Commission_to state clearly to us_today_that_the label will be compulsory and that it will not_therefore be_opposing the amendments_tabled to that effect. We are also expecting a label_that is very clear - one reason_why I am hoping there will not, for example, be objections_to the reference to genetically modified organisms. That_is also why there has compulsorily to_be included on food_product_labels information on products derived from genetically_modified_organisms.
The_legal_base, as pointed_out in the_Papayannakis and Olsson_reports, should_be Article 100a,_and we_expect Commissioner