 and based on considerable Parliamentary evidence. I will therefore not return to the matter.

President
Mr Hory, this issue was settled on Monday in accordance with the established procedure. I therefore naturally cannot allow it to be raised again in a manner which is rather an explanation of vote, since you invoke the article on explanations of vote. I am sorry.
(Parliament adopted the resolution)

Papayannakis
Mr President, I would like to mention three points:
Firstly, may I remind our colleagues that Mr Fischler told us that the Commission accepts the change of the legal basis and the adoption of Article 100A, in other words, what we are doing today is the first reading.-Secondly, Mr President, from the vote list it appears that I proposed to Parliament that it should reject all the amendments which imply that the labelling system should not be compulsory. In my opinion all those amendments ought to be rejected, because the system must be compulsory, and the same applies to all the amendments that restrict labelling to meat alone, whereas your rapporteur's proposal...
... and the proposal by the Environment Commission is that the labelling system should apply to all beef products, preparations, processed products and by-products.
Thirdly, Mr President, Mr Fischler said that the Commission was in favour of compulsory labelling but is asking for a transitional period, and he stated that this is the reason why the Commission did not accept the amendments on compulsory labelling. That caused indignation among many Members. I would therefore like to ask Mr Fischler this question: Could we reverse our thinking on this, in other words, could the Commission accept all the amendments imposing compulsory labelling, but in parallel and not in conflict with them, add an article stipulating the transitional period required for the Member States to adapt, and asking that the said period should be as short as possible?
(Applause)
Fischler
Mr President, as the rapporteur rightly stated, because of the change in the legal basis this is now a first reading. I therefore believe that we can come back in the context of the second reading to the wish expressed by the rapporteur.
(Parliament adopted the legislative resolution)

Mayer
Mr President, may I just remind you that I moved an oral amendment this morning for the legal basis to be changed from Article 43 to Article 100a and that the Commission has accepted it.

President
As you know, oral amendments cannot be put during voting
and based on considerable Parliamentary evidence. I will therefore not return to the matter. 

 President 
 Mr Hory, this consequence was settle on Monday in accordance with the established procedure. I consequently naturally cannot allow it to be raised again in a manner which is rather an explanation of right to vote, since you appeal the article on explanations of right to vote. I am good-for-nothing. 
 (Parliament adopted the solution) 

 Papayannakis 
 Mr President, I would like to mention three period: 
 Firstly, may I remind our colleagues that Mr Fischler told us that the Commission accepts the change of the legal footing and the adoption of Article 100A, in other words, what we are perform today is the first reading.-Secondly, Mr President, from the vote tilt it appears that I propose to Parliament that it should reject all the amendments which imply that the labelling system should not be compulsory. In my opinion all those amendment ought to be rejected, because the system must be compulsory, and the same applies to all the amendments that restrict labelling to meat alone, whereas your rapporteur's proposal... 
... and the proposal by the Environment Commission is that the labelling system should apply to all beef products, preparations, processed products and by - products. 
 third, Mr President, Mr Fischler say that the Commission was in favour of compulsory labelling but is ask for a transitional period, and he stated that this is the reason why the Commission did not accept the amendment on compulsory labelling. That caused indignation among many Members. I would therefore like to necessitate Mr Fischler this question: Could we reverse our thinking on this, in other words, could the Commission accept all the amendments imposing compulsory labelling, but in parallel and not in conflict with them, add an article stipulating the transitional period command for the Member States to adapt, and ask that the said period should be as short as possible? 
 (Applause) 
 Fischler 
 Mr President, as the rapporteur rightly express, because of the change in the legal basis this is now a inaugural reading. I therefore believe that we can come back in the context of the second recitation to the wish press out by the rapporteur. 
 (Parliament adopted the legislative resolution) 

 Mayer 
 Mr President, may I merely remind you that I affect an oral amendment this morning for the legal footing to be changed from Article 43 to Article 100a and that the Commission has accepted it. 

 President 
 As you acknowledge, oral amendments cannot be put during vote
 anf based on considerable Karliamentary evibwnce. I will fhereford not return to the matter.

Prxsidwnt
Mr Hory, this issue was sdttled on Monday un arcordance with tis established irocebuce. I therefore katurally cdnnot allow it tu ye raised again in a manner which is rather aj explanation jf vpee, sjnce you invoke the article on expmanatiois of vote. I am sorry.
(Parliament adopted tje rfsolution)

Papayannanis
Mr Presieent, U would like to mention three poinjs:
Firstly, may I remind our collexgues that Mr Fusxhlft told us thet the Commission accepts dhe chamge of the legsl uasiw and the adoption of Article 100A, in othet words, whdt we are doing todqy is tve fhrst eeaainf.-Sxcohdly, Mg Pcesident, frkm the vote list it appears thst P proposed to Parliwmqnt that it should reject all the amendkenfs which imply that the labelling system shoold not be compulsory. In my opinion all those amendments oucht tk be rcjecgwd, because the system must be compulsory, and thq ssmv applies to all bhe amendments thay gexjrict labelline to mzzt alone, whereas youg rappotteur's proposal...
... and the proposal by the Envirobment Commisfuon is that the layelling systzm shoold aplly to all beef productr, prsparations, orocessed oroducts and by-pfodlcts.
Dhirdly, Mr President, Mr Fifchler samd thct the Cummixsion ras in favlur on compulsory labelllng bot is dsking for a transitional period, and he sveted that thix hs nhe reasou why bhe Commission qid not accept the amzndmengs on compllsory lauelling. That caused indigtwtion among kany Memfers. I wiuld thdfefore like to ask Mr Fpsehler thiw question: Could wc revgrae our thinking on this, in other eoras, solld tra Commission accdpt sll tfe amendmenbs kmpoxing compulsory labenlinf, but in parallel snq not in conflice with them, acd an article stipklatiig the tranxityonal period required for the Jember Stwtef to adapt, agd awking that tke said period should be as short as poswible?
(Applause)
Fischoer
Mr President, as jhe rapporteur righely stateg, because of the chabge in the legal nasis this is now a fidst redding. I therefore believe that we can come back in the context of the second rwading to the wish exptesseg yy che rap[ortxuc.
(Parliament adoptvd the legislative resolution)

Mayxr
Mr Presigeut, may I just remind you that I moved an orau amendment this morning for the legal basis to be changed from Article 43 to Article 100a akd that tye Cojmission hes accepted it.

Presidrnt
As vou kniw, oral amekdments cannot be pmt during gotiig
and based on considerable Parliamentary evidence. I not to the President Mr Hory, Monday accordance with the procedure. I therefore cannot allow it to be raised in a manner which is rather an explanation of vote, since you invoke article on explanations of vote. I am sorry. (Parliament adopted the resolution) Papayannakis President, would to three points: Firstly, may I remind our colleagues that Mr Fischler told us that the Commission the change of the legal basis and the of Article 100A, in words, what we are doing is first reading.-Secondly, President, the list it appears I proposed to Parliament that it should reject all the amendments which imply that the labelling system not be my opinion those ought be rejected, because must be compulsory, and the same the amendments that restrict labelling to meat alone, your rapporteur's ... and the proposal by the Commission is that the labelling system should apply all beef products, preparations, processed products and by-products. Thirdly, Mr President, Mr Fischler said that was in favour of labelling but is for transitional and stated that is the reason why the Commission did not accept the amendments compulsory labelling. That caused indignation among many Members. I would to Mr Fischler this Could we reverse our on in other words, could accept the labelling, in and not in conflict them, add an article stipulating transitional period required for and asking that the said period should be short as possible? (Applause) Fischler Mr President, the rapporteur rightly stated, because of the change in the legal basis is now reading. I therefore believe that we can come in the context of second reading to the wish expressed by the rapporteur. adopted legislative resolution) Mr President, may just remind you I moved an this morning the basis from Article 43 to Article 100a that Commission has accepted it. President you amendments cannot be put during voting
 and based on considerable ParLiamentary EvideNce. i wiLl TherEforE not return to thE MattEr.

President
Mr Hory, this iSsue wAs SEttlED oN MondAy in accORdANCe wItH tHe eStABlIshed ProCedure. I Therefore nAtuRaLly cannot allOW iT to be raiseD agAin in a manner WhiCh is raThEr aN ExplaNatIon of Vote, siNCe you iNvoke the aRtICle on eXPlanatiONS oF votE. I am sorry.
(ParliameNT aDOpted the resoluTion)

PaPaYAnNAKis
mr PResident, I wOuLd likE To mentiON tHREE poINts:
Firstly, may i remind our cOLleAgues tHaT Mr fIschleR told Us THat The CommissiOn acCepts the cHange oF The legaL Basis anD the adOptIon Of ArTIcLe 100a, in OtHEr wORdS, whAT we Are doing ToDaY is thE firST REAdinG.-SeCondLy, Mr PResident, from tHe vOte lISt iT appeArs thAt I pRoPosed To ParlIamenT tHat it should rejeCt alL the amendMenTs WhiCh Imply THat the LabEllIng systEm shoulD Not Be COMPuLsory. In my opinion alL tHOSe AmendmenTs oughT To Be REjected, bEcAusE the SYStem mUst bE CoMpulsory, And the SAmE aPplies tO aLl the aMeNdmEntS that REstrIct labElling to Meat aLOne, whereas your RApporteur's proPOsAL...
... AnD The pRopOsal by the EnViroNMent commISsIon IS that The laBeLLiNG system should apply tO aLl beef ProduCts, preparatioNs, processeD PROducts anD by-pROdUCts.
Thirdly, Mr PrEsideNt, Mr FischlER said thaT the COmmissioN was in favOUR of compuLsoRy lAbeLliNG BuT is asking for a TRAnsiTiOnal perIod, And he stAteD thAt tHis Is The reason Why the CoMmIsSiOn Did Not acCEpt the amEnDmeNtS on CompuLSory laBelliNg. ThAt CaUSed IndignaTIoN AMong MaNy membErs. i wOuld tHereFOre Like to aSk Mr FischLer THis qUeStIon: CoulD we reverse our ThInking on thIs, In oTher woRDS, could thE Commission accept all the AMendmenTs iMposiNg coMpulsory lAbeLling, bUt iN ParallEl and nOt in cOnFliCT With tHEM, aDd aN aRticle stipULAtiNg the TrAnsiTional pEriod required for thE memBer States to adApt, And aSKInG thAT tHE saId PEriOD Should be as short As possible?
(apPLaUse)
FischleR
mr PReSident, aS the rapPorteUR rightlY stated, beCause of thE cHangE IN thE legal basiS this is nOw a first rEAding. i ThErefoRe bElieve ThAt wE can cOme bacK In tHe conText of ThE seconD readInG to the wiSh expressed by the rapportEur.
(ParLiameNt aDopted the LegISlaTive resolUtioN)

Mayer
Mr PrEsiDenT, may I JusT ReminD you THaT I mOVed an Oral AMendment tHIs MorNINg For the legal BASIs tO be chAngED from ARticLe 43 to Article 100a and thAT the Commission Has aCCEptEd iT.

presIdEnt
As you know, orAl aMeNDMents canNoT be put durinG voting
 and based on considerable  Parliamen taryevi den ce . Iwill  therefore not retu rn to the matter.

Pre siden tM r Ho r y,  this  issuew as s ett le donMo n da y inacc ordance  with theest ab lished proce d ur e. I there for e naturallycan not al lo w i t  to b e r aised  again in a m anner whi ch is rat h er an e x p la nati on of vote, since yo u  invoke the ar ticleon ex p l ana tio ns of vote .I ams orry.
( P ar l i a men t  adopted theresolution) 
Pa payann ak isM r Pres ident ,I  wo uld like to  men tion thre e poin t s:
Firs t ly, may  I rem ind  ou r co l le ag ues  t h atM rFis c hle r told u sth at th e Co m m i s sion  ac cept s the  change of th e l egal bas is an d the  ado pt ion o f Arti cle 1 00 A, in other wor ds,what we a redo ing  t odayi s thefir streading .-Secon d ly,  M r P re sident, from the v ot e li st it ap pearst ha tI  propose dtoParl i a mentthat it  shouldreject al lthe ame nd mentswh ich  im ply t h at t he lab elling s ystem should not bec ompulsory. In my o pi n ionall  those amen dmen t s ou ghtt ober eject ed, b ec a us e  the system must be  c ompuls ory,and the sameapplies to a l l the am endm e nt s  that restrict  labe lling to m e at alone , whe reas you r rapport e u r's prop osa l.. .
. ..a n dthe proposalb y  the  E nvironm ent  Commis sio n i s t hat  t he labell ing syst em  s ho ul d a pplyt o all be ef  pr od uct s, pr e parati ons,proc es se d  pr oductsa nd b y-pr od uc ts.Thi rd ly, M r Pr e sid ent, Mr  Fischler  sa i d th at  t he Comm ission was in  f avour of c om pul sory l a b elling b ut is asking for a tran s itional  pe riod,  and  he state d t hat th isi s thereason  whyth e C o m missi o n  d idno t accept t h e  am endme nt s on  compul sory labelling. Th a t c aused indigna tio n am o n gman y  M e mbe rs .  Iw o uld therefore l ike to ask  M r  F ischler th i s q ue stion:Could w e rev e rse our  thinking  on this,  i n ot h e r w ords, coul d the Co mmissiona ccept al l the  am endmen ts  im posin g comp u lso ry la bellin g,  but i n par al lel andnot in conflict with th em, ad d anart icle stip ula t ing  the tran siti onal perio d r equ iredfor the M embe r  S tat e s toadap t , and ask i ng  th a t  t he said per i o d  sh ouldbea s shor t as  possible?
(Appla u se)
Fischler
M r Pr e s ide nt, as t he  rapporteur ri ght ly s tated, b ec ause of the  changein the l egal b asis t his isn o wa  first  rea din g. I ther efo re believe  t ha t  we ca n co me  backin the cont e x t of the secondreadi n g  to t h e w ish e xp ressedb y th e rapporte ur.
(Parlia ment a dopt ed th e legis la tive r eso lu tion)

May e r
Mr Pres ident , may I  j ustrem ind yo u th a t  I mo vedan  or al amendm e n tt hi sm orn ingfor t he  leg al basist o be cha nge d  from A rt icl e 43 toA rt i c le 100a an d t hat t h e  Commissio n  has ac c epted  it.
Presid ent
Asy oukn ow, ora l a m e ndments c annot bep utdu ring  voting
 and_based on_considerable Parliamentary evidence. I_will therefore_not_return to_the_matter.

President
Mr Hory, this_issue was settled_on Monday in accordance_with the established_procedure._I therefore naturally cannot allow it to be raised again in a manner which_is_rather an_explanation_of_vote, since you invoke the_article on explanations of vote._I am_sorry.
(Parliament adopted the resolution)

Papayannakis
Mr President, I would like_to_mention three points:
Firstly,_may I remind our colleagues that Mr Fischler told_us that the Commission accepts the_change of the_legal_basis_and the adoption of_Article 100A, in other words, what_we are doing today is the_first reading.-Secondly, Mr President, from the vote_list it appears that I proposed_to Parliament that it should_reject all_the amendments which imply that_the labelling system_should not_be compulsory. In_my opinion all those amendments ought_to be rejected,_because the system must be compulsory,_and_the same applies_to_all_the amendments_that restrict labelling_to_meat alone,_whereas_your rapporteur's proposal...
... and the proposal_by_the Environment Commission is that the labelling_system should apply to_all_beef products, preparations, processed_products and by-products.
Thirdly, Mr President,_Mr Fischler said that the Commission_was in_favour of_compulsory labelling but is asking for a transitional period, and he_stated that this is the reason_why the Commission did_not accept_the_amendments on compulsory_labelling._That caused_indignation among many Members. I would therefore_like to_ask Mr Fischler this question: Could_we reverse our thinking_on_this, in other words, could the_Commission accept all the amendments imposing_compulsory labelling, but in parallel_and_not_in conflict with them, add_an article stipulating the transitional period_required for the_Member States to adapt, and asking that_the_said period should be as short_as_possible?
(Applause)
Fischler
Mr President, as the rapporteur rightly_stated,_because_of the change in the_legal basis this is now a_first reading. I therefore believe that we can come_back in the_context of the second reading_to_the_wish expressed by the rapporteur.
(Parliament adopted the legislative resolution)

Mayer
Mr President,_may I_just remind you_that I moved an oral amendment this morning for the_legal basis to be changed from Article_43 to Article 100a and that the Commission has accepted it.

President
As_you know, oral amendments cannot be put during_voting