There’s a

famous surrealists’ riddle that asks “
what’s the difference between a duck?” To which, most people will pause, realise that its probably going to take them a bit more time to figure something out that has no immediate or direct relevance to them and so ignore it.
Why am I telling you this? Well, because I’m concerned that the co-operative movement might be starting to become a surreal riddle.
Co-ops are high on the political agenda at the moment, with all the talk of ‘mutualism’, co-op councils and even a cushion manufacturer who’re presenting themselves as a new hybrid co-op model that makes it easier for co-ops to attract external equity investment.
However, co-ops are identified universally by a set of core values and principles. Anything that does not conform to these is not really a co-op (
but perhaps an admirable venture based on social values). And if you start to look more closely at these ‘exciting new co-op models’, you might start to get a bit confused:
1) The ‘
mutualism’ agenda - if you look up the term ‘mutualism’ you realise that what the politicians mean isn’t a true mutual (
which would be run solely in the interests of its members – not a good fit for public services), but rather a workers or multi-stakeholder co-operative
2) The Lambeth Co-op council model states that it will work to an agreed set of principles – not all of which look very complementary or comparable to co-ops’:
Lambeth Co-op council principles:
- The council as the local democratic leader and civil society partner;
- Public services planned together and delivered through a variety of organisations which will improve outcomes, empower citizens and users, and strengthen civil society;
- Citizens incentivised to take part in the provision of public services;
- Public services enabling residents to engage in civil society through employment opportunities;
- Public services accessible from a variety of locations.
(
taken from 'The Co-operative Council Sharing power: A new settlement between citizens and the state')International co-op principles:
- Autonomy and Independence;
- Voluntary and Open Membership;
- Member Economic Participation;
- Education, Training and Information;
- Concern for Community;
- Co-operation among Co-operatives;
- Democratic Member Control.
(
and there is also an additional values set that goes with these, too...Lambeth obvioulsy don't seem to think that a co-op needs values)
3) And
the cushion manufacturer – well, they’re essentially looking at a nice profit share model to incentives employees, but not showing any intent to actually share ownership and power.
But does this really matter?
YES! Co-operatives are only as powerful as they are, and
attract the support that they do because of their unique identity (
an identity that many fear is only loosely protected in law…) If the co-operative movement is to remain as credible and powerful as it is, it needs to ensure that its unique identity remains ‘pure’ and not able to be ‘hi-jacked’ by others masquerading as co-ops when in doing so they only serve to ultimately confuse the general populace as to what co-ops actually are and so damage the movements’ brand and our shared heritage.
…so – when is a co-op not a co-op?