If I was to pinpoint one of the key problems within COPE, then it has be the aversion to technology that many within the leadership have. There can be no greater confirmation to this than the role that aversion has played at the registration for congress.

I am convinced that had we put in place a decent membership system from the outset, much of the fracas could have been avoided. But I also understand fully why that has hitherto been impossible. Any technology service provider would have supplied a secure and robust system, incapable of being manipulated. Therein lies the problem, some do NOT want a fool-proof system in place.

A membership system would have allowed us the benefit of being able to accredit delegates and send the necessary accreditation forms to the branches. After all, to be a modern, progressive organisation, exploring and making use of the benefits of technology is absolutely essential. 

Our former GS, Charlotte Lobe failed dismally in ensuring that technology and the necessary processes around the use of that technology be put in place. Our current GS, Deidre Carter, was left with very little time to correct this matter. But in Charlotte's defence, I believe any system would have been met with suspicion, mistrust and paranoia.

I believe that the congress was planned to deliver an outcome where delegates would feel that they have fulfilled their branch mandates. When I arrived in Pretoria on the morn of 15 December 2010, I went to Heartfelt Arena, where the place was beautifully organised, caterers were ready to serve sandwiches and coffee to the delegates. Thereafter, I went to the Kleinkaap Estate where the delegate registration was to take place. Once again, a delightful discovery, the accreditation centre was well organised; systems were in place and was ready to accredit the media and delegates.

I understand fully why the process broke down. The total number of delegates to attend conference is estimated around 2500. Delegates were supposed to send in their delegate forms to the GS to be verified and captured prior to congress. They would then arrive on the day of registration and proceed to the registration points to be accredited and issued with the delegate tag.

Only 1500 members complied with the process and sent in the necessary documentation timeously. So an extra 1000 who did not comply with the GS's request, for reasons known only to them, needed to be captured on that day. In other words, 1500 members were already loaded and ready for accreditation. One of the groups, commonly referred to as the Express, refused this modern and very common approach insisting that members be reloaded.

The consequences of this was chaotic. Imagine having to recapture the details of 2500 delegates. But even this process had to be aborted on the insistence of the Express. They wanted to adopt a process that was open to manipulation and fraught with problems, where the regional secretaries would vouch for each delegate there. I felt this was preposterous and would yield no legitimate results.

Over the next few months we would need to:

Implement the membership system;

Issue bar-coded membership cards to all legitimate members;

Develop, Implement, Refine and Test our accreditation process and communicate this with every branch and

Plan the elective conference and publish an agenda.

All of these are very easily accomplished but we need to, as a matter of urgency address the culture of intolerance, suspicion and paranoia in order to reconvene a successful elective conference.

Nazier Paulsen is a member of COPE.

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter