I would describe KC/BVA role as reactive or passive.....
AHT have a more proactive role and KC do fund that.

It is possible to have a standard written by people who know very little about the breed history or more likely, little about the points of the dog, and subsequent effects on movement. I could give examples here but I'm not sure it is fair. Likewise health committees who don't know what COI is and cannot grasp concept of popular sires.

The possibility of vested interests is a real one. Cavaliers spring to mind, but of course there are others. Big names in the ring will not rock a boat or want it to be rocked, but are often the first to jump ship from a breed citing ' too many health problems'!! One has to hope that there is a selection of caring breeders who can outweigh the negative influences.

I'm always amused on here when folk adhere to the golden breed standard so rigidly: how many have served on committee and seen how they are formed? Due to KC copyright it is playing with words most of the time. It is also true that many find it hard to evaluate a balanced dog. I am astounded by upright front angulation at the front is rewarded in our breed.....ah well!!!

Thanks for that (the paragraph emboldened really gives me the willies). I really feel that the KC should act as an independent, regulatory body, but then there would be conflict with the registrations side of things - ie. they can't rock the boat too much or there'll be a backlash or boycott and they won't get their pennies from people registering litters. It sounds cliched, but it does sound like the whole system needs shaking up, to benefit dogs and eliminate the possibility of people exploiting dogs for glory or greed and neglecting to address health issues fully. I believe that vets, geneticists and, like you say, experts in construction and movement, have a major part to play.

We have a long way to go with health problems. Some are simple, either the dog does or does not have it but others are much more complex. Epilepsy for example may or may not be hereditory in cause, (in humans & dogs} & hips have a sliding scale & are only partially hereditory so problems there but if the Kennel Club could give a lead by insisting that all dogs registered were hip scored it would be a start. In the show ring in GSDs certainly on the Germanic side most of the adults are scored so I was amazed to see the statistic that in 2008 only a little over 8% of GSDs registered at the Kennel Club are hip scored.I can't think only 8% of dogs are being bred from.

And what with their character and workability?
That has gone down the drain. They heave become coach terriers instead of big monsters and killing machines in a compact size. That's what a terrier is and not a little doll to dress up and do it's nails

If you truly want to see healthy dogs, look at the service dogs. They pay little or no attention to breed standards, and produce dogs free of most health problems and intelligent and well behaved. Many of their dogs are on the strong willed side because they need to be for their job. Of course, perhaps a Lab that was a wimp wouldn't do well retrieving a winged gander.

I don't know that you could require OFA to register dogs since OFA usually isn't done until 2 years. What could be done, at least with the larger breeds would be to require a good OFA or Penn Hips score for the parents in order to register a dog. By requiring more of the parents than just being registered, you could make registered mean something. You could also require something such as the Canine Good Citizen.

I don't see many show dogs that are dressed up like dolls - but their owners do usually check that their nails are kept short

Working instinct is actually quite difficult to breed out of a terrier, or a hound - give them the opportunity and the encouragement and many a couch potato will show its mettle in the field.

I've witnessed the contrary with the JRT in the 80ies i imported them for horsemen now i see many couch potatoes. And the good ones are seen as unruly, dangerous,...