Can Cope stand the test of tough times?

A year on, a lot has been written about Cope’s fortunes. Without wanting to sound like an oracle ensconced in some seat of better wisdom, I want to argue that at the heart of the deferred dream of an alternative government is the failure of visionary, pragmatic and organised leadership within Cope. This failure is expressing itself in an almost non-existent administration, as well as a failure to inspire the population with well-thought out campaigns and sound, focused strategies.

Once the party launches the branches, the members ask the question: What next? If there is no answer, those branches dissipate and become irrelevant. And, in a nutshell, this is exactly what has happened with Cope. The fact that only a tiny percentage of the branches meant to make up Cope in one year have been formed, speaks volumes about the lethargic drive from the top and the despair at the bottom. Put in simple language, the leadership needs to do more to inspire the membership to hold on to the dream.

The reality of South African politics, as evidenced by the Jacob Zuma administration, is characterised by cronyism and a de facto one-party state. This underscores the continued need for a strong opposition that can hold the government to account at every turn. Cope has to rise to the occasion to properly fulfil that role. I am not talking about the daily shouting of the DA, I am talking about an opposition that is patriotic while its constructive engagement presents the said party as an alternative government. If Cope does not wake from its parlous slumber, a new project to hold the ANC accountable may have to be founded by those who are not willing to sit back and watch this country go the way of so many on our continent, where the dream of liberation was turned into a nightmare of poverty for millions and looting by the select few.

Let’s go back to December last year and remember that one of the cornerstones of the formation of Cope was the need to depart from the rot that went on in the ANC. While evidence of this rot was enough to spur on the brave leadership to step out of the ANC, unfortunately the departure of this coterie of former ANC activists has proven to be a weakness. These leaders have not thought carefully about a desired identity for Cope. As a result, the party defines its positioning as “‘against the ANC” instead of focussing on what ”Cope stands for”.

An alternative is not merely based on the weaknesses of the governing party. Therefore, Cope is in dire need of proper and consistent visionary leadership that will prioritise informing the public about their evolving ideology and policy positions. Being absent from national discourse or being disorganised in Parliament is certainly not how one wins hearts and minds. The national and provincial leaders need to generate debate in local communities and visit local community media establishments. They need to conduct meaningful door-to-door visits where they speak to people about the issues that matter for their quality of life. These leaders should also be seen to be taking concrete action to hold government responsible and not merely making promises of a better life. The promise of bringing Parliament to the people must also be fulfilled by conducting proper constituency work.

Short of this outreach to our people and making them appreciate and experience the unique nature of Cope, the perception of “ANC-lite” will linger and go down in history as another failed breakaway of the disgruntled. It’s an unfair label, given the thousands of people in Cope who were never ANC members and believed in the birth of something new. Cope needs an organised leadership that can dust off the glitches of this founding year and establish a modern party characterised by a functioning head office that will lead a dynamic election machinery in preparation for the coming national and local government elections. The proper staging of the policy conference and the elective conference will either make or break this project in the coming year. If these are delayed further or clumsily handled, Cope will be dead in the water. The refinement of policies is going to be crucial in answering the question of Cope’s unique contribution in shaping the political landscape and the development of a clear identity. Hopefully when 2010 is done, Cope will boast a leadership that can inspire South Africans again to capture the spirit that spurred the party on last year in Bloemfontein. Such a leadership must again give hope that an alternative is possible in our lifetime. Much has been made of the leadership contest in Cope. Like any other political party there must be a contestation of power. This must not be feared. What is annoying about Cope is that this whole year was wasted as we failed to acknowledge these squabbles, which distracted the party’s leadership.

More time was devoted to resolving personal clashes than to developing a credible programme of action anchored by recognisable campaigns that speak to issues important to citizens. It is the undue focus on this question at the expense of the programmes of Cope that has become the party’s downfall — not the correct principles of contestation. In the final analysis, the party will rise or fall on the basis of the type of leadership that it presents to the South African people. Above all, it must be organised and have a vision that can stand the test of the tough times ahead.