Minutes of the FIFe General Assembly 2007
Albufiera, Portugal, 24th and 25th May, 2007
21c. Proposals regarding the Judges Rules
He pointed that there were proposals from
- the Judges & Standard Commission
- SVERAK
- Mundikat
- SRK
- AFA and they would be dealt with in this order.
Then he gave the floor to the Secretary of the JSC, Mrs. Friškovec, to present their proposals.
from the Judges & Standard Commission
Proposal 1 – Change to the Judges Rules, addition to article 5.1.3.3
“…The Member must send the original relevant steward certificates to the General Secretary no later than when requesting the preliminary exam for the candidate.
The application must be received by the FIFe General Secretary at least two months prior to the date of examination.…”
There were no speakers. The proposal was carried with 31 yes to 1 no vote.
Mr. Reijers gave the floor to Mrs. Friškovec, who announced the withdrawal of proposal nr. 2.
Proposal 2 – Change to the Judges Rules, article 2.10
“Delete: Article 2.10 Judge’s Updating”
Mrs. Friškovec continued with the JSC proposal 3.
Proposal 3 – Change to the Judges Rules, article 5.1.10
“…For this purpose, FIFe has issued a special form: this standardised student judge’s certificate must be used as the only valid student judge’s certificate document.…!
She explained the intention of the proposal. It was noted by Mrs. Porat that the date should be noted in the footer (on all forms). There were no speakers and the proposal was carried unanimously.
Mr. Wirth-Färdigh asked that the remark regarding the date in the footer of the documents be minuted and Mr. Reijers assured him it would.
Mr. Reijers gave the floor to Mrs. Friškovec to present proposal nr. 4.
Proposal 4 – Change to the Judges Rules, article 5.1.14.8
“At least three trainee assignments 90 (ninety) cats in category I and IV and at least 135 (one hundred and thirty five) cats in category II and III of the total number must consist of “parallel judging” with the instructing judge and apply for all categories. Such parallel judging will normally take place at the end of the training programme, just before the student judge presents himself for the final exam.
Parallel judging:
- The parallel judging is to start no later than the official judging
- The candidate has to judge and make written reports on all cats allotted
- The candidate also selects his “best of variety” and nominations for “best in show”
There were some other speakers. The proposal was carried with 30 yes to 2 no votes.
Mr. Reijers gave the floor to Mrs. Friškovec to present proposal nr. 5.
Proposal 5 – Change to the Judges Rules, insert new article:
5.1.14.9 Requirements for the organizer
“The organizing club is required to ensure that:
- the student judge has at least one steward at his disposal during the entire ”parallel judging”;
- the “parallel judging” takes place under similar conditions as the official judging (light, cages, ring etc.).
There were a few speakers. The proposal was carried unanimously.
Mr. Reijers gave the floor to Mrs. Friškovec to present proposal nr. 6.
Proposal 6 – Change to the Judges Rules, addition to article 5.1.7
“The FIFe will encourage the use of mentorship in the Judges Training Programme. The mid-stream assessment is obligatory.
This midstream assessment is done by the instructing judge when the pupil has completed half of his cats. This evaluation must be written into the pupil’s certificate.
After the approved mid-stream assessment, the student judge must in each participation as a
student judge write a complete judge’s report, which will be evaluated by the instructing judge. A student judge shall in public, under a supervision of the instructing judge assess 5 cats minimum.”
For the JSC, Mrs. Porat stated that the principle was already valid since last year and explained
the procedure for the club and for the pupil at length. She clarified what is meant with a midstream assessment.
Mr. Reijers asked if the Commission would be able to put all requirements for pupil judges together, so the pupil and the club do not have to read all the articles. He also said that for the Secretariat this was a problem and a very time-consuming task.
Mrs. Friškovec said that the new Commission would work on a Guideline to be published.
It was suggested that the Rules should be reworded to correct the plural use, because a midstream assessment only had to be absolved once by every pupil in every category.
The proposal was carried with 26 yes to 2 no votes and 4 abstentions.
from SVERAK
The General Secretary gave the floor to the Swedish delegate, Mr. Wirth-Färdigh.
Proposal 1 – Change to the Judges Rules, addition to article 2.10
“Judges who have been inactive during at least three (3) years shall contact the General Secretary to receive a questionnaire. The answers to the questionnaire shall be sent directly to the Judges and Standard commission before any judging activity, but no later than two (2) months after receiving the questionnaire.”
For the JSC Mrs. Friškovec said that they also felt this matter needed addressing.
There were many other speakers on this subject. Mr. Preiss asked his remarks be taken to this protocol. He said that presently a general policy was missing what to do with judges who had not been active for a longer period. He suggested that this proposal should be given to the JSC to work with and that they could come with a comprehensive new proposal next year. It was asked which questions should be asked to judges who had not been active and which questions had been asked to judges for the Updating procedure. Mr. Reijers answered, that also this (Judges Updating) was a perfect example of yet another rule, which had not been respected or followed, but if the JSC had questions about this, the Secretariat had a comprehensive list, and forms made by a former Commission and could of course provide these to the present JSC.
Mrs. Friškovec asked if SVERAK could withdraw this proposal and let the JSC work with this matter. Mrs. Porat said that under these conditions SVERAK agreed to withdraw their proposal and that they expected a proposal, which addresses this matter for next year.
from Mundikat
The General Secretary gave the floor to the Dutch Mundikat delegate, Mrs. van de Wijngaart, the President of Mundikat, who said that this proposal was withdrawn.
Proposal 3 – Change to the Judges Rules, article 5.1.11
“5.1.11 Participant as a student judge at:
- 10 respectively 15 and 20
- National shows
- International shows
- And/or Special breed shows or breed club matches in one of the following chosen categories:
- 10 x category I: i.e. a minimum of 450 cats
- 15 x category II: i.e. a minimum of 675 cats
- 10 x category IIIa: i.e. a minimum of 450 cats
- 10 x category IIIb: i.e. a minimum of 450 cats
- 10 x category IV: i.e. a minimum of 450 cats.”
Mr. Reijers stated that the first proposal from SRK had been reworded: It now also included the Show Organiser. He gave the floor to Mrs. Paloluoma-Sundholm, President of SRK.
from SRK
Proposal 1 – Change to the Judges Rules, addition to article 5.2.4
“The examination fee will be divided into three parts: 1/3 for FIFe, 1/3 for the organizing club and 1/3 for the two examining judges.”
Mr. Reijers gave the floor to the FIFe Treasurer who said he was happy the show organisers had now been included. He expressed his concern that more requests for compensation would be made by judges, for example for supervising stages. Mr. Reijers said he was also glad to see the change to include the show organisers, who spent most money and a lot of effort for judges’ exams. In addition, nowadays, when the JSC made the exams ready to use for the examining judges, he thought it would be better to split it three ways: Show organiser, examiners, and FIFe. The floor was given to Mrs. Friškovec for the JSC, who said that they had voted unanimously in favour. For the Show Commission, Mr. Kurkowski said they had not voted concretely on this matter but they were sure that Show organisers would be happy with this proposal.
There were some speakers. The proposal was carried with 28 yes to 1 no vote and 3 abstentions.
The AFA delegate, Mrs. Claire-Anne Frii, could not attend the GA. No instructions were received to withdraw the proposal. Mr. Reijers pointed out that this proposal had been withdrawn in 2006 and he read out the proposal:
from AFA
Proposal 1 – Addition to the Judges Rules
“We propose that FIFe’s International Judges that assist to the update seminar given during the annual meeting, to be able to take this same seminar on countries outside
Europe where they might be invited to judge, in order to be updated as well and able to evaluate others also, during their judging career, in their home countries or in countries where they are invited to judge.”
For the JSC, Mrs. Friškovec said that they considered this more of a letter than a proposal. She also stated that national Members could organise their own seminars, and she said that their Commission had voted unanimously against this proposal.
The proposal was rejected with 3 yes to 20 no votes and 9 abstentions.
21d. Proposals regarding the Show Rules
The General Secretary pointed that there were many proposals. They were from:
- the Show Commission
- the Health and Welfare Commission
- NFFe
- Aristocat
- KKÖ
- FFL-Lux-Cat-Club
- ANFI
- ZFDS
- AMIL
- MFF and they would be dealt with in this order.
He then gave the floor to the Secretary of the Show Commission, Mr. Kurkowski, to present their reworded proposal. Mr. Kurkowski explained that their proposal was a large proposal, subdivided in 22 parts. It was the intention to correct and clarify many matters in the Show Rules.
the Show Commission
Proposal Change to the Show Rules, articles: 1.4, 1.4b, 1.5, 1.8.f-h, 1.10b-c, 1.10h.b, 1.13, 1.16, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 3.10k, 4.8, 5.5, 1.10a, 6.1a 6.9, Annex 1, 5, 11
Proposal 1 – delete in article 1.4
“Show dates may only be booked up to 10 calendar years in advance. Existing dates, already booked, may stand.”
There were no speakers and it was carried with 29 yes to 2 no votes and 1 abstention.
Proposal 2 – change to article 1.4 b
b. Exceptions are:
- Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom and Iceland;
- Overseas countries; which may organise shows even when a show is held less than 400 km away on the European continent.”
There were a few speakers: it was carried unanimously.
Proposal 3 – addition to article 1.5 (reworded)
“It is forbidden to exhibit any new breeds resulting from a mating between domestic cats (felis catus) to a wild cat species or from a mating between a domestic cat (felis catus) to a hybrid cat (F1 – F4) out a crossing with a wild cat species”
There were no speakers and the proposal was carried with 31 yes to 1 no vote.
Proposal 4 – move 1.8 f (last sentence) to 1.8 h and addition
“The amount of cats required for Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, Iceland, Malta, and Patronage members is reduced to 100.”
Mrs. van de Wijngaart asked for Malta to be added to the paragraph and for this to be minuted.
This addition was fully supported by the Board. There were some other speakers and with the change suggested by Mrs. van de Wijngaart, this proposal was carried with 30 yes to 2 no votes.
Proposal 5 – modification of article 1.10 b:
“send the affiliated societies publish a schedule stating:
- availability or not of accommodation ..until... nights
names of the judges and the categories they are qualified to judge, i.e., I (PER/EXO), II (Semi-longhair),”
There were no speakers and the proposal was carried unanimously.
Proposal 6 – Change to art. 1.10 c (together with proposal 9)
“The show management is obliged to keep the following documents for a minimum period of three years:
- all copies of judges’ reports
- copies of the list stating the cats nominated for the selection of Best in Show
- original list of the cats proposed by each judge
- a show catalogue including all results and absent cats”
There were no speakers and the proposal was carried unanimously.
Proposal 7 – Deletion of last Sentence in article 1.10 h.b
“Such shows will be marked with a special sign in the show list (for example *).”
The floor was given to Mrs. Friškovec for the Judges Commission, who said that this proposal also affected the JSC very much, because also the Stewards were, after all, their responsibility.
Mrs. Kaae explained the reason for this proposal. Often the fact that only stewards carried the cats was not correctly indicated in the show calendar compared to what was written in show-flyers. In the FIFe show-calendar on the FIFe website, there is a field for special shows where it is possible to indicate that the cats are presented by stewards exclusively.
There were many other speakers and a lengthy discussion took place. The proposal was carried with 28 yes to 2 no votes and 2 abstentions.
Proposal 8 – Addition to art. 1.13
“Exhibitors, wishing ….(rest remains unchanged)… The duly authorized controller will then stamp the entry forms or confirm by e-mail before their despatch to the (rest remains unchanged).”
There were no speakers and the proposal was carried unanimously.
Proposal 9 – Change to article 1.16
“The show catalogue and a list (rest remains unchanged)… FIFe Secretariat – the list shall contain the awarded CAC, CAP, CACIB, CAPIB, CAGCIB, CAGPIB, CACE, CAPE, Best of Breed and Best in Show all results including BIV, NOM, BIS and absent cats.
There were no speakers and the proposal was carried unanimously.
Proposal 10 – Change to article 2.2
“The World Show shall always take place on the last weekend in October. The exact date of a World Cat Show must be fixed at least two years before and must appear clearly in the official FIFe show calendar.”
There were no speakers and the proposal was carried with 31 yes to 1 no vote.
Proposal 11 – Addition to article 2.3
“The World Show is only open for cats of fully recognized breeds belonging to FIFe members”
Mr. Reijers clarified that the intention of this proposal was not to forbid preliminary recognised breeds’ entry to the show hall of the World Show, but that only fully recognised breeds could compete and he said he wished this to be minuted.
There were several problems with the grammar of the 3 languages and the confusion about “member” and it was requested and decided to change this proposal and postpone it until after the coffee break.
Proposal 12 – Change to article 3.1 (reworded)
“All cats must be registered either in the LO or RIEX of a FIFe member with the exception of Domestic Cats Housecats and Novices. Housecats older than 10 months must be neutered. “
Ms de Courcy Rolls asked her remark to be minuted: she said that this should also be indicated in the Breeding and Registration Rules, article 2.5.
Mr. Reijers said that he automatically assumed that the FIFe Breeding and Registration Rules were only meant for pedigreed cats, cats that were supposed to be bred with and Mr. Grytvik supported his views on this matter.
There were some speakers and the proposal was carried with 25 yes to 7 no votes.
Proposal no. 13 – Rewording of article 3.10.k
“any qualification higher than Excellent (=88>92 points) (no certificate, BIV or NOM).”
There were no speakers and the proposal was carried unanimously.
Proposal 14 – Rewording in article 4.8 (reworded)
“Best in Show - The Best in Show can be chosen from:
Overall: Category I (Persian and Exotic), II (Semi-longhair), III (Shorthair and Somali and IV (Siamese and Orientals) Category I, II, III and IV
Separate: (Persian and Exotic) I (Semi-longhair) II (Shorthair and Somali) III (Siamese and Orientals) IV Category I, II, III, and IV
Each category can have BIS titles as:
- adult male
- adult female
- adult neuter male
- adult neuter female
- youngster 6-10 months (not divided by sex)
- kitten 3-6 months (not divided by sex)
Housecats can have BIS titles regardless of hair-length, age, and sex
There were many speakers and suggestions to change the proposal. The proposal was carried with 27 yes to 3 no votes and 2 abstentions.
Proposal 15 – Addition to article 4.8
“Nomination conditions:
Each judge may nominate one exhibit in each category he is judging as:
- adult male
- adult female
- adult neuter male
- adult neuter female
- youngster 6-10 months (not divided by sex)
- kitten 3-6 months (not divided by sex)
provided they have obtained at least 97 points.
The breed must be fully recognized.
Housecats may be nominated regardless of age as:
- male shorthair
- female shorthair
- male longhair
- female longhair”
There were some speakers and the proposal was carried with 28 yes to 4 no votes.
Proposal 16 – Change in Heading and article 5.5 – Preliminary breeds
“Preliminary recognized breeds
Those cats, which are not fully recognized, will receive a qualification (Excellent, Very Good, or Good) and will be classified, but will not receive a certificate (CAC, CAP or more).These cats may not compete for Best in Show, but may compete together for a 'Best of variety’.”
(If the proposal is carried, the Breeding and Registration Rules should be changed accordingly. Already obtained titles will be kept)
Mr. Kurkowski asked if it was possible to deal with this proposal after the proposal from the LO-commission dealing with the preliminary recognised breeds. He explained that if the proposal of the LO Commission would be carried the Show Commission would like to withdraw their proposal.
Mr. Reijers stated that this would then be a change of agenda, and needed a vote.
The request was put to the Assembly if this could be done and Mr. Wirth-Färdigh, said that SVERAK as one of the Members supported this request.
This additional change of agenda was carried with 25 yes to 7 no votes and so proposal 16 would be dealt with after proposal number 5 of the LO Commission.
Proposal 17 – Change to art. 1.10a (together with Proposal no. 18)
“The organizer must choose recognized judges from those, appearing on the official list (rest unchanged + also deleted until end) to the FIFe Secretariat “
Mrs. Friškovec stated that the JSC voted unanimously in favour.
There were no speakers and the proposal was carried with 30 yes to 2 no votes.
Proposal 18 – Addition to article 6.1.a
“recognized judges: Only judges recognized by FIFe are allowed to judge at national and international shows, which are organized by federations or clubs, affiliated to the FIFe. Judges belonging to other organizations are authorized to judge, according to the FIFe standard, those breeds which they are licensed to judge by their own organisation after being approved by the Board of FIFe separately for each assignment,.
They cannot undertake:
- to supervise a stage;
- to act as an examiner.”
Mrs. Friškovec stated that the JSC voted unanimously in favour.
There were some speakers and the proposal was carried unanimously.
Proposal 19 – Rewording of article 6.9
“No exhibit can be awarded (rest unchanged + also deleted until end) of 93 points in the Open or Neuter class.
No exhibit can be awarded a certificate unless it has obtained the qualification EXCELLENT 1 and the minimum of points for its class:
Class 3-4: CACE – CAPE 97 points
Class 5-6: CAGCIB – CAGPIB 96 points
Class 7-8: CACIB – CAPIB 95 points
Class 9-10: CAC – CAP 93 points
Best in Variety: BIV 95 points (see 4.9)
Nomination: NOM 97 points
The reason for withholding a certificate has to be stated on the report. (see 6.11).”
There were no speakers and the proposal was carried unanimously.
Proposal. 20 – Move from article 6.9 to 4.9
“The 'BEST in VARIETY' title cannot be refused, if the exhibit has obtained the necessary 95 points in its class.” (Move to Art. 4.9)
There were no speakers and the proposal was carried unanimously.
Proposal 21 – Deletion of Annexes 1 and 5
“Exceptions for Portugal
Exceptions for Norway and Sweden”
The proposal was carried with 29 yes to 2 no votes and 1 abstention.
Proposal 22 – Move from Annex 11 to article 6.9
“Certificates and titles, which were not obtained according to FIFe Rules, should not be recognised as international points.”
There were some speakers and the proposal was carried unanimously.
Now Mr. Reijers gave the floor to the Health & Welfare Commission, to Mrs. Vanja Knez.
from the Health and Welfare Commission
Proposal 1 – Modification of the Show Rules, article 1.8 c
“1.8 Conditions for an International Show
c. That the cats have been vaccinated by a veterinary surgeon in accordance with each country’s veterinary regulations, against panleucopenia and cat-flu and have had the required boosters, at least 15 days prior to the show.
The cats have to be vaccinated with boosters at least every second year; the last vaccination has to be given no more than two years (730 days) before the show.
The period of validity for the vaccination is marked by the veterinary surgeon on the pet passport or vaccination certificate.
Vaccination against rabies is to be according to national legislation; “
For the Show Commission, Mr. Kurkowski said that they were unanimously against. There were many speakers and a long discussion. The proposal was carried with 24 yes to 8 no votes.
The Assembly had a lunch break and reconvened at 14.30
After lunch, Mr. Reijers gave the floor to the delegate for NFFe, Mr. Simeonov.
from NFFe
Proposal 1. - Title I - reorganization of art. 1.10 by splitting into two articles:
“1.10. The Organizers’ Responsibilities The organizers must:- a. choose the judges (until)…which they are entitled to judge in their own country/organization, and such invitations must be reported to the FIFe Secretariat.
- b. f. 14 days before the show, the organizer is obliged to send the judges that are judging at a particular show, the name and address of the arranged for them hotel as well as. The judges must also be information about as to the transfer to the hotel it at least 14 days before the show.
- c. b. send the affiliated societies a schedule stating:
- the date of the show, the location and address of the show hall, the closing date
- the amount of the entry fee and account number(s) (bank or others) to which payment of the entry fees must be effected
- names of the judges and the categories they are to judge, entry requirements concerning health and border formalities
- opening and closing times of the show
- availability or not of accommodation for cats on the night before the show and during the following nights
- list of hotels where cats are admitted to allow exhibitors to make their own reservations.
- d. give the necessary documents to the judge before judging commences.
- e. provide the Judge’s ring with cages for a min. number of 4 cats near the Judge’s table.
- f. Equip the judges’ cages and those for nominated cats with partitions.
- g. c. keep the following documents for a minimum period of three years:
- a show catalogue, including results
- all copies of judges’ reports
- original list of the cats proposed by each judge
- copies of the list stating the cats nominated for the selection of Best in Show
- list with all the results – from the individual judging and the Best in Show”
Note: Text from l “h.” to the end of 1.10 becomes new art. 1.10a with rearrangement as follows:
1.10a. Presentation of the cats
- a. h. Each FIFe member may organize cat shows according to choosing one of the following procedures ways for presentation of the cats for judging:
- a. The cats on show are brought to the judge and back to their cages by stewards. In this case at least two stewards must assist each judge. The stewards will take reasonable actions to avoid presenting his their own cats.
- b. The owner or a person chosen by the owner him/her may presents his/her cats to the judge. In cases where owners, for whatever reason, cannot present their cats to the judge, stewards may be made available. In this case at least one steward must assist each judge. Such shows will be marked with a special sign in the show list.
- b. When the second way for presentation of cats is chosen:
- c. the exhibitors himself have the possibility of placing their cats inside the appropriate judging cages by themselves. The steward calls up the cage number of the cats (cage number) which the judge requires or places the number on the holding cage.
- Each judge has his judging cages – *exists in art. 1.10*
- Each judge has a steward at his own disposal – *included in letter “a” and exists in art.
- 2.9.5 of the Rules for Judges, Student Judges and Stewards*
- in cases when owners, for whatever reason, cannot present their cats to the judge If an owner is not able – or does not wish – to bring his their cats to the judge’s cages himself by themselves, the steward is obliged to fetch those cats, place them in the appropriate judging cages, present them to the judge and after judging take them back to their showing cages.
- once the judging has been completed and the judge’s results assessment has been given, the judge or his/her steward will ask the owners to collect their cats.
- c. The cat should always be presented with the its catalogue number in writing.
- d. Once all the cats are …(until) judges ring and the judge begins the judging. and The cats are presented to him/her by a steward or according to the chosen type of the show.
- d. A cat is only to be….(until)….. steward has checked that with the show secretariat.
- e. During the “BIS” only (until) present the cats regardless of the type of the show.”
If accepted it will change the reference in art. 1.10 in article 6.5, letter “a” as follows:
“6.5. Judge’s Ring
a. Access to the judge’s ring is prohibited to:
- exhibitors, except if the show is organized according to article 1.10a, letter “a”, second bullet
- members of the organizing committee if they are exhibitors, except if the show is organized according to article 1.10a, letter “a”, second bullet
- visitors.”
Mr. Reijers gave the floor to Mr. Kurkowski for the Show Commission, who said they were against.
Because this proposal was so comprehensive Mr. Simeonov was asked to indicate what changes would be made. There was a lengthy discussion.
Mr. Steinhauser suggested that Bulgaria should work together with the Show Commission to correct some of the small mistakes and withdraw the proposal. Mr. Simeonov wondered if a new article could be inserted without a proposal. Clearly the answer was no, so for that reason he did not withdraw their proposal. It was pointed out by Mrs. Porat if NFFe was aware that if this proposal was not carried, it could not come back the following year.
Mr. Simeonov stated he was aware of this, but that he was surprised to find so much opposition against this proposal and said that because of this NFFe would withdraw the proposal.
Mr. Reijers pointed out that over the years he had noted that the shorter and more concise the proposals were, the better their chance of acceptance was.
He then gave the floor to Mr. Simeonov for NFFe’s reworded second proposal. The largest change was the change of the title itself, from “DV” to “DVM”. It read:
Proposal 2. – Addition to the Show Rules, Title IV, article 4.16
“4.16. Distinguished Variety Merit (DVM)
This title is only available at National and International Shows to cats in classes 1-12, including neuters, youngsters and kittens. To obtain the title, the cat must win “Best in Variety” a minimum of 10 times. The shortest qualifying period possible is two years and one day between the first “Best in Variety” and the tenth. This is to prevent a cat becoming a DVM too quickly.
In case this proposal is accepted, the new title should be reflected:
1. the heading of Title IV of FIFe Show Rules and in the abbreviations in point 4.1.
2. table 5.2 of the FIFe B&R Rules with a remark to be placed after the full name of the cat.”
For the Show Commission, Mr. Kurkowski stated that they had voted against this proposal unanimously. Mrs. Friškovec said for the JSC that they had not voted on this matter but that they liked this proposal very much.
There were many other speakers and the proposal was carried with 19 yes to 13 no votes.
The General Secretary gave the floor to Mr. Simeonov again to introduce proposal number 3.
Proposal 3. – Addition to the Show Rules, Title VIII, article 8.2 b
“b. An adult cat or neuter which does not have a FIFe title must be entered into Class 9 or Class 10 respectively if the pedigree is recognized by the show organising FIFe Member. A youngster or kitten must be entered into Class 11 or Class 12 respectively. If the pedigree is not recognized by the show organizing FIFe Member, the adult cat must go through the Novice Class and the youngster or kitten must go through the Control Class with respect of the requirements for these classes laid down in article 5.4. A cat with a FIFe title or one possessing certificates towards a FIFe title shall be entered in the appropriate class.”
The floor was given to Mr. Kurkowski for the Show, Mrs. Friškovec for the JS and to Mr. Grytvik for the LO Commission: all three stated their Commissions had voted unanimously against.
A lengthy discussion took place after which the proposal was withdrawn
Mr. Reijers suggested to now first return to proposal nr. 11 of the Show Commission, which had been looked at in detail during the break and was amended. He gave the floor to Mr. Kurkowski.
the Show Commission (continued)
Proposal 11 – Addition to article 2.3 (reworded)
“Only cats of fully recognized breeds belonging to individual FIFe members may compete at the World Show.”
It was stated by Mrs. Pohl and Mr. Steinhauser that there were still inconsistencies in the French and German versions of the proposal and these were clarified by Mr. Reijers who read out the correct versions in French, German and English. He also stated that in order for a rule to be correct in any of the FIFe languages and similar in translation did not necessarily have to mean that they had to consist of the same amount of words or sentences. One of the problems in FIFe over the years had been bad and incorrect translations and when one came across a possibility to correct one should not miss the chance. The fact that the above proposal in English was shorter and a single sentence did not mean the meaning differed from that in the German and French.
The proposal was carried with 29 yes votes and 3 abstentions.
The General Secretary gave the floor to Mrs. Grob for Aristocat, to explain their first proposal.
from Aristocat
Proposal 1. – Absolute and definite cancellation of Art. 1.11 ribbons and rosettes
“1.11 Ribbons and Rosettes
CAC, CAP, CACIB, CAPIB, CAGCIB, CAGPIB, CACE, CAPE and BIV ribbons or rosettes will be supplied by the organisers”
For the Show Commission Mr. Kurkowski said that they had voted unanimously in favour.
There were no speakers and the proposal was carried with 22 yes to 9 no votes and 1 abstention.
Mrs. Grob went on with their second proposal.
Proposal 2 – addition to the Show Rules, Title VI Art. 6.1 – f and g (reworded)
“Title I Art. 1.10. a – addition
a Deviations respectively number of cats to be judged (Art. 2.9.3 of the judges’ rules) should be discussed between the organizing club and the judge.
Title I Art. 1.10. b – addition
b Shows have to be organized in a way that judges are not strained more than necessary. Waiting times should be as short as possible. The end of the Best in Show should not exceed 5 p.m. in order to enable judges to travel home the same day. Deviations should be discussed between the organizing club and the judge.”
Mr. Kurkowski for the Show Commission and Mrs. Friškovec for the JSC both said their Commissions had voted unanimously against.
There were many other speakers and after a lengthy discussion, the proposal was withdrawn.
The General Secretary gave the floor to Mr. Preiss, of KKÖ, to explain their reworded proposal.
from KKÖ (reworded in French as well)
Proposal 1 – Addition to articles 3.4 and 3.9 of the Show Rules
3.4 Admission to Shows“- docked or cropped cats”
3.9 Faults leading to disqualification. The following cats must be excluded from competition:
“u. Docked or cropped cats”
Mr. Preiss said that he did not feel there was a lot to explain and that this proposal was surely self-evident. Mr. Lubrano stated that surely the French version had to be corrected, as it was now, it could mean that neutered cats were not allowed and the spelling of cat as “chatte” gave a completely wrong idea. For their Commissions, Mr. Kurkowski, Mrs. Knez and Mrs. Friškovec stated their unanimous support for this proposal.
There were some other speakers and the proposal was carried unanimously.
The Assembly had a coffee break and reconvened at 16.15
After this break, the General Secretary gave the floor to Mrs. Pohl, for FFL-Lux-Cat-Club.
from FFL-Lux Cat-Club
Proposal 1 – Change to the Show Rules, articles 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5 –delete 1.4
“Exceptions are made for members as outlined in article 1.4 and Annex…..”
Mr. Kurkowski stated for the Show Commission that they had not voted on this proposal.
There were no other speakers. One delegate was not present, so the total amount of votes was now 31. The proposal was carried with 25 yes votes and 6 abstentions.
Mr. Reijers asked Mrs. Pohl to continue with proposal nr. 2 and she stated it was withdrawn.
Proposal 2 – Change to the Show Rules, delete Annexes 1 and 5
Then he asked Mrs. Pohl to continue with proposal number 3.
Proposal 3 – Change to Show Rules, deletion of part of Annex 8 (CAGCIB/CACPIB)
The proposal spoke for itself, and Mrs. Pohl explained the reason. For Felinolog (BY) Mrs. Stoliarova took the floor and said that Belarus needed one more year.
For the Show Commission, Mr. Kurkowski said they were unanimously against.
There were no other speakers. One delegate was not present, so the total amount of votes was now 31. The proposal was carried with 17 yes to 11 no votes and 3 abstentions.
Mr. Reijers gave the floor to Mrs. Kowalczuk for ANFI, to explain their first proposal.
from ANFI
Proposal 1 – Change and deletion to the Show Rules, articles 4.14 - DSM
“To obtain the title, the cat must win BIS or BOS a minimum of 10 times. The shortest qualifying period possible is one year and one day between the first BIS or BOS and the tenth. This is to prevent a cat becoming DSM to quickly.”
Mr. Kurkowski said that the Show Commission was unanimously against.
After a short discussion, the proposal was withdrawn.
The General Secretary announced that proposal nr. 3 of ZFDS was withdrawn due to the acceptance of proposal nr. 19 of the Show Commission.
from ZFDS
Proposal 3 – Addition to the Show Rules, article 6.9
“…In the same class the exhibits will be classified with 1, 2, 3, 4; there are no joint places. In all classes, where certificates can be awarded, only the first classified exhibit can get the certificate if it has obtained the necessary points required for the certificate in its class”
The General Secretary gave the floor to Mrs. Preisler, the President of AMIL, to explain their amended proposal number 1, which now also included Malta.
from AMIL
Proposal 1 – Addition to the Show Rules, Annex 9
“Due to the geographical location and the climate in Israel and Malta, there is an exception to Article 4.15 which allows to issue the title of Junior Winner in these countries to cats, which have been “Best in Show” three (3) times in classes 11 and 12.”
For the Show Commission, Mr. Kurkowski said that they were unanimously in favour. There were no speakers. The proposal was carried with 19 yes to 9 no votes and 4 abstentions.
For the last proposal concerning the Show Rules, the General Secretary gave the floor to Mrs. van de Wijngaart of Mundikat, which carried the proxy for Malta.
from MMF
Proposal 1 – Addition to the Show Rules, new Annex
“MFF proposes it be allowed the following exceptions to the FIFe Show Rules:
1) To organise International shows with 100 cats.
2) To obtain the following titles - All certificates may be obtained in the same country:
International Champion/Premier – 5 CACIB/CAPIB from 3 different judges
Grand International Champion/Premier – 7 CAGCIB/CAGPIB from 5 different judges.
European Champion/Premier – 10 CACE/CAPE from 7 different judges.”
Mr. Reijers wondered if it could not simply be an addition to Annex 3 for the UK, Iceland, and Israel, after all, the whole article was the same. He asked Mrs. van de Wijngaart if she agreed, and she did. He also stated that the Board was very happy that Malta had brought this proposal, which was suggested to them by the Board the year before.
Mr. Kurkowski said for the Show Commission that they had all voted in favour. Mr. Sagurski said that the total number of delegates was again 32. There were no other speakers and the proposal was carried with 27 yes to 5 no votes.
