The cooperative system is perhaps the last major activity that the State has not touched, especially since the government is the last entity capable of managing it. For half a century, it has failed even to choose temporary managers for the cooperative societies until the boards of directors are elected. Its choices have been unsuccessful, with the corruption of the ‘chosen ones’ rarely being less severe than that of the ‘elected ones’.
Furthermore, cooperative societies are the biggest headache for Ministry of Social Affairs officials, and no one seems to know the best way to preserve their current status, prevent privatization, or prevent a government takeover. This requires the concerted efforts of various parties to come up with the best way to reduce the stigma within such a cooperative system, which is supposed to be ideal. It is so in the countries of ‘infidelity’, but it has failed in the land of 2,000 mosques.
After more than 60 years of cooperative experience, it is imperative to review and develop it for the better, and to enact strict laws to address serious violations, as they have become a symbol of terrible corruption, especially since their share of the consumer market has reached nearly 70 percent. It can be said, in general, that the majority, if not all, of cooperative management is weak, governed by bureaucracy and red tape. This has given rise to all forms of corruption and favoritism.
They have historically been known for wasting resources, lacking resources, and failing to control expenses, with the prevalence of nepotism in appointments. It is also necessary to combat corruption and address shortcomings, such as the misuse of the free goods system. It is necessary as well to stop the exaggeration in the prices of shelves and refrigerators, prevent the extortion of large suppliers to compensate for deficits and losses, and put an end to the deception of purchasing large quantities to obtain free goods or discounts, then returning the goods to the supplier while keeping the discount. It is imperative to address unjustified delays in paying the cooperative’s dues.
The cooperatives complain about the interference of their members in the elections of other entities, to gain influence, the appointment of inexperienced and incompetent individuals, and the lack of even a minimum educational qualification for board members. Almost all cooperatives lack cleanliness in the market, warehouses and bathrooms. Small businesses are no longer able to compete with larger organizations, which have grown through acquisitions and mergers.
Many believe that developing cooperative work and increasing its efficiency and competitiveness can be achieved by merging them under a single management for each governorate, bringing their number down to six instead of 75. A single union will unite them, and each governorate will have a member representing it in the cooperative’s board of directors, who will participate in setting its policies, regulations and social activities. The savings that will result from the merger are unimaginable, as there will be no need, for example, to employ 75 general managers, 75 supervisors, accountants, auditors and so on. It will require the establishment of a central oversight department to monitor the implementation of policies and procedures adopted by the governorate’s cooperative board of directors.
Giving every citizen the freedom to purchase from any cooperative, while preserving their right to receive the profits from their purchases, will increase competition among various cooperatives to provide the best services and attract shoppers. It requires the introduction of automation and artificial intelligence into their operations, and the use of the best sales and warehouse control systems. All of these features are available in many advanced systems, and all that is required is to purchase them.
By Ahmad alsarraf
email:a.alsarraf.alqabas.com .kw
